plan_metadata_changes

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

Discloses that secrets remain redacted and that actual writes are deferred to approved apply_plan, behavior not present in annotations. Adds a prerequisite for new versions. No annotation contradiction.

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?

Three purposeful sentences with the core purpose first and caveats after. The releaseType reference is potentially confusing but not verbose.

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 six-parameter tool with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description omits essential guidance on the root parameter, locale semantics, and how the returned plan is represented. The unresolved releaseType mention adds ambiguity, so an agent cannot reliably construct a correct call.

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?

With zero schema descriptions, the description explains how domains behave (locale-only appInfo/versionMetadata doesn't cover categories etc.) and that new versions require the version domain. However, it leaves root, locales, platform, and manageCategories undefined and mentions releaseType, which is not present in the schema.

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 it plans selected AppStore locales/domains against an editable app/platform/version. The added caveat about what locale-only appInfo/versionMetadata does not cover helps distinguish from broader planning tools, though no sibling tool is named.

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 routes actual writes to apply_plan, giving a clear alternative for execution. The caveat about categories/copyright/release/review exclusion clarifies what this plan covers, but it does not compare with other plan_* siblings.

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