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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: results are bounded, sorted, API-paginated with a maximum of 50 entries per call, and each value is capped at 500 characters. This helps an agent anticipate limits and pagination without contradicting the annotations.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds the key pagination and size constraints. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 an export tool with a thorough input schema, an output schema, and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description is complete enough. It covers sorting, pagination, entry limits, value caps, and the one-locale scope. No critical operational behavior is missing.

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 project, language, skip, and limit. The description adds helpful context that the export is sorted and paiated, which supports the skip/limit semantics, but it does not provide further per-parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Export' with a specific resource ('one locale of a MultiLocale project') and describes the output as 'bounded, sorted key/value entries'. This clearly distinguishes it from listing or searching tools in the sibling set. It also adds the important one-locale scoping detail.

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 conveys that the tool is for exporting a locale dicionary and is API-paginated, so the usage context is implied. However, it does not explicitly state when this should be preferred over siblings such as list_phrases or search_phrases, nor does it mention exclusions or alternatives.

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