add_application

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

No annotations provided; description discloses required parameters and admin requirement for team_id, but lacks details on side effects or error conditions (e.g., duplicate repository).

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?

Extremely concise: one-line purpose, clean Args/Returns sections, no superfluous text.

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?

Covers parameters and return value; could mention error scenarios or prerequisites, but sufficient given simplicity.

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?

Description adds meaningful context to parameters: repository_url is for 'SSH or HTTPS URL for cloning' and team_id is 'optional...must be admin', which is beyond the schema's type-only info.

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 verb 'add' and resource 'application to Codemagic', but does not differentiate from sibling tool 'add_application_private'.

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?

Provides some usage context (team_id requires admin), but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives or when not to use it.

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