create_app_store_version

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the creation action and the existing-app prerequisite. It does not disclose side effects, duplicate-version behavior, validation rules, permissions, or what state the new version is created in.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single, tightly written sentence with no filler. The core purpose and key exclusion are front-loaded, so an agent can quickly grasp the tool's function.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The output schema exists, so return-value details are not required from the description. However, the description omits parameter semantics, platform options, and workflow context, leaving the agent to infer important details from the schema and sibling names.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies that app_id refers to an existing app record. It does not explain version_string format, acceptable platform values, or any constraints on the parameters beyond the schema's type/default information.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Create a new App Store version') on a specific resource ('EXISTING app record') and explicitly clarifies what it does not do ('does not create the app itself'). This clearly distinguishes it from any app-creation tool without needing to inspect siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the tool should be used when an app record already exists and a new version needs to be created. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives, when not to use it, or workflow steps like attaching a build or submitting for review.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.