appstore__yorum_yanitla

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

Annotations already declare the tool is a destructive, non-read-only, open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral trait those annotations do not convey: the response only goes live after Apple moderation. It stops short of stating edit/overwrite semantics for an existing developer reply.

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 short sentences, the action front-loaded and the moderation caveat immediately following. No filler whatsoever.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action and the delayed-publication outcome, and annotations carry the destructive/open-world signal. Minor gaps remain around permissions and whether an existing reply can be replaced.

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 100%, so every parameter (yanit, onayla, yorum_id) is already documented, including the 5970-character limit and the confirmation flag semantics. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline 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 gives a clear verb+resource: writing a developer response to an App Store review. Naming 'App Store' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling play__yorum_yanitla, but it never explicitly routes between the two platform variants.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the alternative sibling (play__yorum_yanitla for Google Play, or appstore__yorumlar for reading reviews first). The agent must infer the context entirely.

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