Skip to main content
Glama

sonar

by app.trysonar

Set Screenshot Translations

sonar_set_screenshot_translations
Idempotent

Write a locale's translation overrides for screens in a screenshot set (text copy, localized captures/images). Geometry and styling always come from the source layout; anything not overridden falls back to it. The locale is auto-enabled on the set. Requires a write-scope API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
localeYesTarget locale code, e.g. "de-DE", "pt-BR", "zh-Hans".
set_idYesScreenshot set id.
entriesYesOne entry per screen to localize.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant value beyond annotations: it clarifies the write nature ('Requires a write-scope API key'), discloses the side effect of auto-enabling the locale, and explains fallback behavior. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core action and resource, the second clarifies boundaries and fallback, and the third adds side effects and prerequisites. Perfectly front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers purpose, boundaries (geometry/styling), fallback, side effects (auto-enable locale), and prerequisites (write-scope API key). No gaps left for an agent to infer.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level context about what overrides include (text copy, localized captures/images) but does not provide additional parameter details beyond what the schema already describes. Minor added value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('Write') combined with a clear resource ('locale's translation overrides for screens in a screenshot set'). It explicitly lists what is overridden (text copy, localized captures/images) and what is not (geometry/styling), effectively distinguishing this from sibling tools like sonar_update_screenshot or sonar_create_screenshot_set.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for usage, noting that geometry/styling always come from the source layout and that falls back to unspecified overrides. However, it does not directly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool, leaving some ambiguity among the many screenshot-related sibling tools.

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

All sonar toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action or data aspect within the ASO domain. Keyword-related tools are clearly separated by purpose (tracked keywords vs. research vs. suggestions vs. metrics), and competitive tools differentiate between reading landscape and generating new analysis. No two tools have overlapping functionality that would confuse an agent.

Naming Consistency3/5

Naming is a mix of verb-first (e.g., sonar_add_screenshot, sonar_create_product) and noun-first patterns (e.g., sonar_app_keywords, sonar_competitor_landscape). While all use snake_case and the 'sonar_' prefix is consistent, the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure makes it harder to predict tool names. The pattern is readable but inconsistent.

Tool Count2/5

With 47 tools, the server is over-scoped for a typical MCP server. Although the ASO domain is broad, many tools are granular (e.g., 10 screenshot tools, 10 keyword tools). This quantity exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many' as defined in the calibration, making it heavy for an agent to navigate comprehensively.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full ASO lifecycle: app discovery, keyword research, tracking and ranking, competitor analysis, revenue estimation, screenshot creation and export, alerts, and product management. There are no obvious gaps—every necessary operation for monitoring and optimizing app store presence is present, including both read and write actions.

Resources