apple_list_placements

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' implies read-only and 'in display order' usefully signals sorted output with embedded assets, but nothing is said about pagination, permissions, or what happens with the four different target types.

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 words; the ordering and asset-inclusion facts are useful. It is tight but skimpy given the parameter surface it has to support.

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?

A four-parameter list tool with zero schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema needs the description to explain targetType/placementType/placementGroup roles and return shape. The one-sentence description leaves the agent guessing on all of these.

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 implicitly covers localizationId ('for a localization'). The three other parameters — targetType (with its four-value enum and default), placementType, and placementGroup — get no explanation of their meaning or interaction at all.

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?

Specific verb (list) plus resource (placements) plus scope ('for a localization') and even mentions display order and included image/video assets. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the adjacent apple_list_asset_placements sibling, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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 gives no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and names no alternatives. It never says how this differs from apple_list_asset_placements or that apple_create_placement / apple_reorder_placements are the mutating counterparts.

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