Language.Translate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the important non-obvious trait that calling this incurs Cloud Translation API cost. It says nothing about quota/rate limits, per-request text size limits, latency, or whether results are cached, which are the remaining risks for a billed external API call.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the cost warning placed where it will be read before invocation.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, leaving only action semantics and cost. For a three-parameter, single-purpose call the description is sufficient to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so all three parameters are undocumented in structured fields. The description compensates for source_language only ('' / omitted means auto-detect) but leaves target_language format (BCP-47 code vs. language name) and any text length constraints unspecified.

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?

A specific verb plus resource ("Translate text into a target language") that an agent can act on without opening the schema. It does not name the sibling language.batch_translate, so the single-vs-batch distinction is only inferable from the tool name.

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?

Usage is implied by the operation itself, and the parenthetical gives one useful conditional (source is auto-detected when omitted). However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer language.batch_translate for multiple strings or language.detect_language for inspection only.

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