check_app_update

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral information. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, how results are returned (e.g., boolean, version comparison details), rate limits, or error conditions. The description states what the tool does but not how it behaves.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every word contributing to understanding the core function.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that performs a version check. It doesn't explain what 'up to date' means in this context, what the return value indicates (e.g., boolean, latest version number), or error handling for invalid inputs. The description covers basic purpose but misses critical behavioral and output details.

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?

The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate parameter documentation solely through the schema, with no additional value from the description.

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 the tool's purpose as checking if a specific app version is up to date, using the verb 'check' and specifying the resource (app version). It distinguishes from most sibling tools which focus on retrieving data rather than checking status, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar update-related tools (none exist in the sibling list).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing app ownership), context for version checking, or comparison to other tools like 'search_apps' for app discovery. Usage is implied but not explicitly defined.

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