apple_set_build_encryption

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a mutation and that true may trigger compliance documentation requirements, but it omits permissions/auth, reversibility, idempotency, and response behavior.

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 the core action first and the compliance caveat second. Every clause contributes useful information with no padding.

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 low-complexity, two-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, timing, and the key compliance side effect. The remaining gaps—permissions and post-set behavior—are minor for correct invocation, though notable given the absence of annotations.

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 coverage is 50%: buildId has a schema description, but usesNonExemptEncryption does not. The description adds meaning to the boolean by explaining its submission/compliance implications and clarifies that buildId refers to a processed build, but it does not document buildId format or whether the answer can later be changed.

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 ('Set'), specific resource (a processed build's usesNonExemptEncryption answer), and timing ('before submission'). It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like apple_assign_build and apple_submit_for_review.

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 submission' gives clear timing context for when to use this tool, and the caveat about true requiring documentation adds domain guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, so it falls short of a 5.

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