Get Microsoft app by AppId

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return includes AppRoles but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects or limitations. Minimal behavioral context beyond the basic function.

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 sentence of 20 words, front-loading the purpose and including all essential elements. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the input (exact AppId) and output (full record with AppRoles). It could mention the output format (e.g., JSON) but is nearly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The only parameter, appId, is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces that it is an exact GUID lookup but adds little additional meaning beyond the schema's own description. Per guidelines, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Return' and the resource 'full record for a single Microsoft first-party app', including the differentiator 'including all of its exposed AppRoles' and the lookup method 'by exact AppId (GUID)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_microsoft_apps by specifying an exact ID lookup.

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 implies usage when you have an exact AppId and need the full record, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools. Context with siblings like search_microsoft_apps suggests this is for single-record retrieval, but explicit when-not guidance is absent.

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