apple_update_app

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. It says this is an update and identifies the affected settings, but it does not state permission requirements, whether the update is partial or full-replacement, what null values do, or what happens to other submission settings.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. It immediately communicates the update target and the specific settings involved.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It identifies the fields being changed but omits behavioral details such as permissions, reversibility, partial-update semantics, and response expectations.

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 only 33%, with primaryLocale and contentRightsDeclaration undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates by naming those two settings, but it does not explain the content-rights enum meanings, null semantics, or primary locale format, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 verb ('Update') and resource ('app-level submission settings') and names the two editable fields, so the tool's purpose is clear. It does not explicitly distinguish this update target from nearby siblings such as localized app-info or category updates, keeping it just below a 5.

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 says what can be updated but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apple_update_app_info_localization or apple_update_category, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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