kaeris_list_languages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (mapping of language code to English name) and provides an example. This makes the behavior predictable, though it could be more explicit about being a read-only operation with no side effects.

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 only two sentences plus an example, with zero waste. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the example clarifies the output format. This is an ideal length for a simple list tool.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is quite complete. It explains what is returned and how to use the result with other tools. It could additionally mention that the list is static or that no authentication is needed, but that is likely inferred from the context.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so the schema conveys no additional information. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't need to add parameter details. It correctly mentions nothing about parameters, which is fine since there are none.

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 tool's action ('List every target language') with a specific resource ('KAERIS can translate into'). It includes a concrete example ('{"es": "Spanish", ...}') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kaeris_translate or kaeris_add_language, which perform different actions.

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 instructions: 'Use the codes with kaeris_translate / kaeris_translate_file.' This tells the agent when to use this tool's output. However, it does not mention alternative tools or explicitly say when not to use it, which would be needed for a 5.

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