app_software_version_update

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and not readOnly. The description adds 'full replace' which reinforces destructive nature but does not disclose additional behaviors like required permissions, side effects, or success/failure modes. Minimal value beyond annotations.

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 concise at one sentence plus a link, but it lacks structure; it does not front-load key details beyond the core action. Adequate but not exemplary.

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 no output schema, no param descriptions, and a complex resource with nested body, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the body should contain, the meaning of version, or response details. The spec link partially mitigates but the description itself is incomplete.

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?

Input schema has 3 required params (appSoftwareId, buildNumber, body) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter semantics, leaving the agent to infer from the link or name alone. This is a critical gap.

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 updates one version of an app-software with a full replace (PUT). The verb 'update' and resource 'app-software version' are specific, and the 'full replace' distinction differentiates it from create or get siblings.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create or get. The description only states the HTTP method and full replace nature, without any context on prerequisites or when to prefer this over other operations.

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