Developer console apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the result is scoped to a single store and includes both the connected accounts and their visible apps with tracking status, which tells the agent what it will actually get back. It stops short of covering the no-console-connected case or auth prerequisites.

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?

A single dense sentence with zero filler, front-loaded with the resource and immediately followed by the payload contents. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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?

With one enum parameter, full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what is listed, per which store, and the tracking flag. Minor gaps remain around behavior when no console account is connected, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema documents it fully with an enum and inline description. The description reinforces the per-store scoping but adds no syntax or behavior beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific resource (connected developer console accounts for a store, plus the apps they can see) and adds the distinguishing payload detail of per-app tracked status. An agent can tell this is a read-only inventory of console connections rather than the act of connecting (connect_console) or adding apps (add_console_apps), though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not statement and no named alternative. Usage is only implied by the content: the 'already tracked' flag suggests using this to check state before add_console_apps or to inspect what connect_console produced, but the agent must infer that.

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