apple_list_availability

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, any required permissions, rate limits, or what happens if the app is invalid. The minimal description fails to compensate for the lack of annotations.

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 a single, terse sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any indication of the response format, possible errors, or behavioral nuances, which would improve completeness.

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?

With 100% schema coverage and a single parameter 'appId' described as 'App ID', the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The description could have contextualized the parameter (e.g., 'the unique identifier for the app'), but it does not, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 'List territories where the app is available' uses a specific verb 'list' and clearly identifies the resource 'territories' in the context of app availability, distinguishing it from sibling list tools like 'apple_list_apps' or 'apple_list_beta_groups'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. For a straightforward listing tool, some context about typical use cases would improve clarity.

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