apple_update_phased_release

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the one high-stakes behavior: COMPLETE immediately releases the update to all users. However, it says nothing about what PAUSED means for users already on the rollout, whether COMPLETE is reversible, permission requirements, or failure modes.

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 clause lists the actions, and the semicolon clause delivers the one caveat that matters most. No filler, nothing to trim.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main risk but omits reversibility, preconditions, and the effect of each state transition. An agent can select it correctly but must still guess at operational details.

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 only 50%: the 'state' enum has no per-value description. The description compensates by mapping natural-language verbs to enum values (pause→PAUSED, resume→ACTIVE) and flagging the semantic weight of COMPLETE, which is exactly the meaning the schema lacks.

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 names a specific verb set (pause, resume, complete) and a specific resource (an existing phased release), which clearly separates it from apple_create_phased_release, apple_get_phased_release and apple_delete_phased_release in the sibling list. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings or stating the tool is the only mutator of release state.

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?

'An existing phased release' implies the precondition that a release must already exist, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. version approved for release), and no routing to alternative tools for other release operations.

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