apple_get_asset_library

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 does not state that this is a read-only operation, does not describe the returned structure, does not mention required permissions or rate limits, and does not say what the 'library' 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter getter, though 'reusable' is somewhat vague and the trailing list of asset types adds little precision.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at minimum explain the identifier convention and what the returned library represents. Neither is covered, leaving the agent to guess key details before invocation.

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 single parameter appId has no format guidance. The description says 'for an app', which loosely ties appId to an app identifier, but it does not say whether this is a numeric App Store Connect ID, a bundle ID, or another identifier — a meaningful ambiguity for Apple tooling.

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 ('Get') and resource ('reusable App Asset Library for an app') and scopes it to the appId. The mention of screenshots, previews, and creative assets ties it to asset upload workflows, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the many sibling asset tools (apple_list_assets, apple_get_asset, apple_upload_asset).

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 phrase 'before uploading screenshots, previews, or creative assets' implies a when-to-use context, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tool to choose instead (e.g., apple_list_assets vs apple_get_asset_library).

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