[Read] Get an App Store Connect app

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

The description explicitly discloses 'Read-only', which is important given no annotations are provided. However, it does not describe what 'details' are returned, potential ambiguity of matching by name, error behavior, or permission requirements. With no annotations, this leaves some behavioral gaps for an agent to infer.

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 two short sentences, front-loads the key read-only behavior, and every word contributes meaning. No filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 simple single-parameter tool and full schema coverage, the description provides sufficient invocation guidance. The absence of an output schema is partially mitigated by the clear 'details for a single app' phrasing, though a fuller list of returned fields would make it 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?

The schema already fully describes the parameter as 'Bundle id, app name, or App Store Connect app id' (100% coverage). The description adds concrete examples (io.tmkch.colorvia, Colorvia) and clarifies that the numeric id is not mandatory, adding value beyond 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Gets details for a single app') and the resource ('app'), and distinguishes from list-style siblings by emphasizing 'single app'. The read-only nature is front-loaded, and the identifier options are explicit.

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?

It provides clear context on how to invoke the tool: by bundle id, app name, or numeric App Store Connect id, with a reassurance that the numeric id is never required. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for listing or search, but the 'single app' framing implies the appropriate use case.

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