[Write] Create a new App Store version

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the main side effect (creating a version), a critical non-effect ('does not submit anything for review'), and the dryRun preview behavior. It omits details like permissions, idempotency, or response shape, but the most important behavioral distinctions are present.

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 compact and front-loaded with purpose, then options, then caveats. The leading 'Write.' is redundant with the title's '[Write]' and the example could be trimmed slightly, but each sentence carries useful information and the overall length is appropriate.

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 7-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, the no-submit caveat, and dryRun. However, it does not state what the tool returns, how duplicate version strings are handled, or error behavior, leaving some gaps for an agent to fully rely on it in a multi-step workflow.

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 71% (5 of 7 parameters documented). The description adds value by naming optional fields (copyright, releaseType, earliestReleaseDate) and listing releaseType enum values. However, it largely repeats schema info for dryRun and earliestReleaseDate, and does not explain copyright's format or releaseType semantics beyond the enum values.

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 uses a specific verb ('Creates') and resource ('a new App Store Version'), includes a concrete example ('prepare 1.1 for review'), and distinguishes itself from submission by stating 'This does not submit anything for review.' This clearly separates it from sibling tools like asc_version_update, asc_versions_list, and asc_submit_for_review.

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 a clear use case ('prepare 1.1 for review'), notes an important exclusion ('does not submit anything for review'), and mentions dryRun for previewing. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools (e.g., asc_version_update or asc_version_ensure), so it falls short of a 5.

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