lokalise_remove_language

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the most critical behavior: 'Critical Warning: Permanently deletes ALL translations for this language. Export translations first if needed.' This fully informs the agent of the irreversible 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?

Three sentences covering purpose, usage, and a critical warning. No redundant information, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 removal tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: operation, when to use, required params, return value, and a crucial warning about data loss. No 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds little beyond what the schema provides, only listing the required params. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already carries the semantic load.

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 action ('Drops support for a language by removing it from the project') with a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'update_language' or 'delete_project'.

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use when discontinuing localization for a market or cleaning up test languages.' It does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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