Get Localization

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose what happens when the key is missing, whether a default language is assumed, or any permission/caching behavior — it merely restates that a value is retrieved.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that maps directly onto the two parameters, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple read tool, though it could spend one more clause on fallback behavior.

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 2-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. The key gap is fallback/default-language behavior and missing-key handling, which the schema does not cover.

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 both parameters (key, lang) are already fully documented with lengths and the ISO 639-1 language list. The description adds nothing beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Gets a single localized string value by key'. The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling horizon_get_all_localizations, though the alternative is never named explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. An agent gets no help deciding between this, horizon_get_all_localizations, and horizon_get_localization_languages, nor on the trade-off of omitting the optional lang parameter.

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