Upload a build to App Store Connect

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, yet the description adds real context the annotations cannot: the API-key auth requirement, the explicit confirm:true gate, the outward-facing nature of the call, and the Pro-feature prerequisite. It stops short of describing irreversibility or what happens on a partial/failed upload.

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?

Three short, front-loaded fragments with no filler; the action and destination lead, constraints follow. The telegraphic style ("Outward-facing", "Pro feature") is compact but slightly under-explained rather than wasteful.

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 3-parameter, no-output-schema mutation tool with safety already covered by annotations, the description supplies the missing auth, confirmation, and entitlement context. It omits failure/retry behavior and any hint about the platform parameter, which keeps it shy of complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both ipa_path, confirm, and platform are already documented with defaults. The description reinforces the confirm gate and the .ipa type but adds no format, path, or platform-selection detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (upload), resource (signed .ipa), and destination (App Store Connect via altool), which is clearly more than a restatement of the name. It does not, however, distinguish itself from nearby siblings like build_and_archive or attach_build, so an agent must infer which stage of the pipeline this occupies.

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?

"Requires confirm:true" and "Pro feature" give concrete invocation conditions, and "outward-facing" hints at the level of commitment. But it never says when to use this versus siblings (build_and_archive, attach_build, list_builds), leaving the sequencing of an upload pipeline implicit.

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