Upload APK

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the upload targets an open edit (a mutation prerequisite) and notes the APK vs AAB policy difference, but it does not describe permission requirements, rate limits, whether an existing APK is replaced, or what the response contains.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste, front-loading the action and following with the key alternative condition. Efficient and clear.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and fully documented parameters, the description covers purpose, the open-edit prerequisite, and the APK/AAB choice. It could mention the need to validate/commit the edit afterward, but that is implicit in the 'open edit' phrase and covered by sibling tools.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (editId, filePath, packageName). The description adds no format or meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (uploads an APK file) and scope (into an open edit). Explicitly names the sibling play_upload_bundle and the condition that differentiates it (new apps require App Bundles), so an agent can distinguish without opening schemas.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: prefer play_upload_bundle for new apps since Google Play requires App Bundles, while APK upload remains for existing APK-based apps. This is a clear alternative condition and leaves nothing to inference.

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