release_preflight

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

Describes what it checks but does not disclose side effects (e.g., read-only vs. writes), output format, or permissions needed. Without annotations, description carries full burden; it provides basic behavioral info but lacks depth.

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 concise sentences, no filler. Front-loaded with the core purpose and key checks.

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 single parameter and no annotations, description covers the purpose and scope well. Could mention output nature (e.g., report of issues) for completeness.

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 100% (app_id with description). The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond the schema. 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?

Description clearly states verb ('audit') and resource ('pre-submission audit of app metadata'). Specifically mentions it checks metadata, character limits, screenshots, build status, and catches rejection causes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like app_details or metadata_diff.

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?

Implies usage before app submission to catch rejection causes. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but context makes it clear. Could be improved by stating not for post-submission issues.

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