Search App Store Connect API

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false; the description is consistent, noting the corpus is a static OpenAPI spec rather than a live API. It adds the downstream call sequence but says nothing about result shape or ranking, which matters for a search tool with no output schema.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core action and the example queries front-loaded before the workflow hint.

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 read-only search with no output schema, the description covers what the tool searches and what to call next, so an agent can act confidently. The remaining gap is what a result actually contains (path, name, method), which the description leaves implicit.

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 67% and the schema already documents both `query` (with its own examples) and `method` via enum. The description's example queries add mild value for `query` but say nothing about `limit`, which is the one undocumented parameter.

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 and resource ("Searches all App Store Connect API endpoints"), names the corpus (Apple's OpenAPI spec), and gives concrete example queries. It also explicitly positions itself against the rest of the toolset: endpoints "the other tools don't cover."

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use condition (finding endpoints not covered by the curated sibling tools) and an explicit follow-up chain: "then describe_endpoint and api_request." The alternative workflow is spelled out rather than inferred.

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