appgallery_api_request

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions the token type and endpoint prefix, but does not disclose behavior such as side effects, error handling, rate limits, or authentication prerequisites beyond the token. The generic nature of the tool limits what can be said, but more transparency is needed.

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 that front-loads the purpose and key constraint (endpoint prefix). It is concise, but could benefit from a slightly more structured format to improve readability.

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 the complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, enum, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It omits details on parameter usage, response format, error handling, and authentication flow beyond mentioning the token. For a generic API request tool, this is insufficient for reliable agent invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions the endpoint pattern but does not explain the method, data, or params parameters. Without this, an AI agent lacks guidance on how to construct a valid request, making the tool difficult to use correctly.

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 clearly states it makes requests to AppGallery Connect API using client OAuth token, specifically targeting /api/publish/v2/* endpoints. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that target other platforms (Huawei, Samsung) or different authentication flows.

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 explicitly recommends using this tool for /api/publish/v2/* endpoints, providing context on when to use it. However, it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools for other endpoints, leaving some ambiguity.

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