apple_update_version_localization

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

While the description indicates mutation, it fails to disclose behavioral details such as whether fields are overwritten or merged, constraints on field values (e.g., length limits), or idempotency. With no annotations provided, the description should cover these but does not.

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 concise sentence that efficiently conveys the basic purpose. However, it could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details about return values, side effects, and required context (e.g., that localizationId must correspond to an existing version localization), leaving the agent underinformed.

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 low (29%), and the description merely lists field names without adding constraints, formats, or usage context. It does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions, providing little additional meaning beyond the field names.

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 clearly states the verb 'Update' and the resource 'localization fields', listing example fields. The tool name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like create and list operations.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a localization ID from a prior list call), and no exclusions or scenarios where it should not be used.

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