Get the App Store Listing Guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful context by disclosing the returned guide contents, the project file format, Apple field limits, screenshot folder conventions, and that the CLI commands push/pull using the user's own App Store Connect key.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the usage trigger and then lists the returned artifacts in a logical order. It is somewhat dense and run-on, especially the parenthetical about store.config.json and CLI commands, but most of the detail earns its place for a reference-guide tool.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned, and it does so thoroughly: file format, per-field Apple limits, screenshot sizes per device/language, and relevant npx commands. For a read-only, parameter-light guide tool with annotations covering safety, nothing material is missing.

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?

There is one optional parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the analytics-only purpose of `context`. The description does not mention this parameter or add any usage nuance beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 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?

The description states a specific resource (App Store listing guide) and enumerates the exact fields and artifacts covered: name, subtitle, keywords, screenshots, store.config.json, limits, and CLI commands. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling guide tools such as get-react-native-guide or get-widget-guide by scoping everything to App Store listing metadata.

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?

It gives a clear when-to-use trigger: writing, editing, translating, previewing, or publishing an App Store listing. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the scope is specific enough that an agent can route correctly.

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