create_app_screenshot_set

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses a hard constraint and its failure mode (bare display type values are rejected with a 409 error), but says nothing about required permissions, idempotency, or what a successful call produces.

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 tight sentences, front-loading what is created and then the one non-obvious constraint with concrete examples and the error code. Nothing is padded and no sentence is wasted.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the parameter constraint well but leaves the safety/auth profile and return behavior unaddressed. It is adequate rather than complete given the absence of structured guidance elsewhere.

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 the schema already documents both parameters, and the description largely repeats the APP_ prefix rule and examples already in the screenshotDisplayType field. The 409 rejection detail is the one addition beyond the schema, making this a baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new screenshot set') and scopes it to an app store version localization, which lets an agent separate it from siblings like list_app_screenshot_sets, upload_app_screenshot, and delete_app_screenshot without inspecting schemas.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource name and required localization ID, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites (e.g. that the localization must already exist), and no routing to alternatives such as upload_app_screenshot for populating an existing set.

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