Get Similar Apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to restate these. However, the description adds no behavioral details beyond a basic purpose statement, such as what happens when both 'id' and 'appId' are supplied, parameter precedence, or locale defaulting behavior.

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, focused sentence of 12 words. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete because it does not explain which of the four optional parameters is necessary to identify the app. This is critical for invocation and is not adequately covered by the schema descriptions alone.

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?

All 4 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra semantic meaning, but the schema already documents each parameter adequately, so no deduction is warranted.

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 'Get the apps shown as related to a given App Store app' clearly states a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like app_store_search, app_store_reviews, or app_store_ratings. It unambiguously conveys the tool's function of retrieving similar apps for a given app.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and there is no mention of prerequisites such as needing either 'id' or 'appId' to identify the app. The optional parameters make usage ambiguous without additional instructions.

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