Upload screenshots to the store

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the confirmation-dialog flow, the ~2 minute denial window producing error not_approved, that dryRun skips the dialog, that unchanged sets are skipped, and that it is a background job to follow with wait_for_jobs. These are real operational facts an agent cannot infer from destructiveHint/openWorldHint alone.

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?

Front-loaded with 'LIVE:' and the mutation scope, then preconditions, then the dialog mechanics, then the follow-up step. Dense but every clause carries decision-relevant information; no filler.

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?

For a destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema, the description covers the approval gate, failure mode (not_approved), idempotency nuance (unchanged sets skipped), and the required follow-up (wait_for_jobs). Nothing an agent needs before calling 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns extra by explaining that dryRun needs no dialog and by framing the approval parameter as quoting the owner's go-ahead seen 'in this conversation'. It does not add much for projectId, but the risky parameters are well contextualized.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('replaces the screenshots') plus exact scope ('editable App Store version or the Play listing', 'the rendered set'). The parenthetical that unchanged sets are skipped and nothing is submitted for review separates it cleanly from screenshots_render, screenshots_export, and publish_listing.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition ('Only call after the owner has seen the screenshots and told you to upload them in this conversation') and an explicit non-destructive alternative ('dryRun checks everything without changing the store and needs no dialog'). The when-not case is covered by 'nothing is submitted for review'.

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