Search the App Store

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that it supports keyword search with country/locale/pagination controls, but does not disclose default pagination behavior or error handling. Given annotation coverage, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core action and key controls without unnecessary words. It effectively summarizes the tool's purpose and parameters.

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?

The tool has a well-documented schema, annotations, and an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool, though it could briefly mention that results are app listings. Overall, the description is sufficient for a straightforward search tool.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all six parameters, including term, num, lang, page, country, and idsOnly. The description's mention of 'country, locale, and pagination controls' adds no meaning beyond what the schema already states. A baseline score of 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 explicitly states 'Search the App Store by keyword' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions country, locale, and pagination controls, making it distinct from sibling tools like app_store_reviews or app_store_app. This is clear and non-tautological.

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 for keyword-based App Store searches but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives. It does not state when to choose this over app_store_suggest or app_store_similar, leaving the agent to infer from the name and schema. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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