[Read] List App Info localizations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses 'Read-only' behavior and enumerates the exact fields returned (name, subtitle, privacy policy URL/text, privacy choices URL) for every locale. However, it does not mention pagination, error behavior, or required permissions, which would add further transparency.

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?

Two sentences: the first states the operation and scope, the second contrasts with a related sibling. No redundant words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter list operation with no output schema, the description is largely sufficient: it defines purpose, scope, fields, and differentiation from the closest sibling. It lacks notes on pagination or empty result behavior, but these are minor given the limited scope of localizations.

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 describes appId fully (100% coverage), and the description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond tool-level behavior. The description's 'for every locale' clarifies scope but not the parameter format or constraints, 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?

The description clearly states 'Lists app-level localized fields... for every locale' with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from asc_metadata_get, identifying the boundary between app-level and per-version fields.

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?

The description names asc_metadata_get as an alternative and explains exactly what it covers differently ('per-version fields like description/keywords'), providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling.

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