[Write] Upload a build to App Store Connect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the multi-step process (create upload, chunked send, MD5 checksum) and that processing continues on Apple's servers, which is valuable context. However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects such as overwriting.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value—covering file types, the upload mechanism, and follow-up steps. No wasted words.

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 complex upload operation, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, how it does it, and what to do next. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by explaining that processing continues on Apple's servers and directing to status tools.

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 description coverage is 80%, so the parameters are mostly self-explanatory. The description adds minimal parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, such as file paths and versions, but does not compensate for the uncovered 20%.

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 tool uploads a build binary (.ipa/.pkg) to App Store Connect, with specific file formats and platforms listed. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like asc_build_upload_status by describing the upload process itself and pointing to follow-up steps.

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 provides clear workflow guidance: poll asc_build_upload_status and then asc_builds_list to monitor the upload's completion. It implies the tool is for initiating uploads, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives.

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