Get App Privacy Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that the data is 'published' privacy labels and policy info, but discloses no additional behaviors like rate limits or error handling. This is acceptable given the annotations but not exceptional.

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 about ten words, front-loaded with the action and resource, with zero waste or redundant content.

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 an output schema exists to explain return values, the annotations cover safety, and the parameters are self-explanatory via the schema, the description is sufficient for the agent to understand the tool's scope. No critical context is missing.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (id and country), achieving 100% coverage. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so it remains at baseline.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and names a precise resource ('privacy labels and policy information') for an App Store app. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like app_store_reviews or app_store_ratings, which target different data types.

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 provides clear context: it is for retrieving privacy-related app data. However, it stops short of explicitly stating when to use this tool over alternatives or noting exclusions, so it misses the top score for guidance.

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