get_current_app_store_overview

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

With no annotations, description carries the burden. It lists the metrics returned, which adds some behavioral context, but it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no app is selected (error?), any rate limits, or authorization requirements. It is adequate but not complete.

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 dense and front-loads the prerequisite in bold. Every sentence provides value. It is slightly wordy in the prerequisite workflow, but overall efficient and structured.

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 tool's complexity (2 simple optional params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage context, prerequisite workflow, and return metrics. It is largely complete but lacks behavioral transparency details like error handling or safety guarantees.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions for start_date and end_date. The description adds that these are optional and affect 'daily trend data', which enriches the meaning. It does not repeat schema details but provides context.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves store overview metrics for the currently selected app, listing specific metrics (page views, downloads, reserves, etc.) and optional date range. The verb 'get' and resource 'store overview' are specific, and the description distinguishes from siblings by requiring a selected app and referencing related tools.

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?

Explicitly states prerequisite (app must be selected) and provides a detailed workflow: call get_current_app_info first, and if no app is selected, guide user through list_developers_and_apps, show list, ask user, call select_app. This is exemplary guidance for when to use and when not to use.

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