lokalise_get_glossary_term

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'Fetches' details and returns data, implying a read operation. However, it doesn't discuss authentication, rate limits, or any side effects. The description is adequate but could be more explicit about its non-destructive nature.

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 four sentences, each adding value: purpose, required params, use cases, and return description. It is front-loaded with the main action and avoids redundancy.

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 simple read-only tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, use cases, and return type comprehensively, leaving no significant gaps.

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?

The input schema (100% coverage) already describes both parameters clearly. The description adds minimal value by restating 'Required: projectId, termId' and mentioning 'by ID'. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb 'Fetches' and resource 'complete details for a single glossary term by ID'. It distinguishes from the sibling list tool by specifying 'single' and 'by ID', and elaborates on use cases like understanding translation rules and viewing language translations.

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 explicitly lists required parameters and provides specific use cases (e.g., 'understand precise translation rules, check case-sensitivity requirements'). It doesn't mention when not to use or name alternatives directly, but the context implies it's for detailed term lookup vs. listing.

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