select_app

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the caching side effect ('will cache the selection for all modules') and the critical user confirmation constraint. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but the caching and confirmation guidance are sufficient for this tool.

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 with a few sentences covering purpose, important note, and use cases. It is front-loaded with the core action and avoids fluff, though slightly repetitive in listing use cases.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, usage guidance, behavioral impact (caching), and when not to call. It could mention return value or errors, but the core context is complete.

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% and the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for developer_id and app_id. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 'Select a specific developer and app to use for subsequent operations' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning caching across modules and listing use cases like switching accounts.

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?

Explicit instructions are provided: 'Only call this tool AFTER the user has explicitly confirmed which app they want to use. DO NOT call this tool automatically without user confirmation.' It also gives when to use (general selection, switching accounts, after listing) and an alternative for H5 upload.

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