lokalise_create_glossary_terms

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral info. It discloses bulk creation up to 1000 terms and returns created terms with IDs, but does not clarify mutability, idempotency, or handling of duplicates.

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?

Description is brief (3 sentences), no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose and then lists required/optional params and return value. Efficient.

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?

Given no output schema, the description appropriately notes the return value. It covers required parameters, optional flags, bulk limit, and usage examples. Sufficient for a create tool.

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 each parameter. The description adds a narrative summary of required and optional fields, but no additional syntactic details 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?

Description clearly states it adds terminology rules to maintain translation consistency. The verb 'creates' is implicit in 'adds', and the resource is glossary terms. It distinguishes from siblings like delete and update through the name, but no explicit differentiation in text.

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?

Provides usage context: 'Use for brand names, technical jargon, or untranslatable terms.' However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools like update_glossary_terms for modifying existing terms.

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