AI-translate a field (async job)

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

Discloses async nature, caching, re-translation with force, and daily caps. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; does so well but could mention overwrite behavior or permissions.

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 concise sentences front-load the purpose. Every phrase adds value: identifies tool type (async job), scope (one field, target locales), caching, force usage, and rate limits. No wasted words.

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?

Covers key behaviors (async, caching, caps) but omits return value description, async result polling, and guidance for selecting optional parameters (variantId vs iapProductId). Sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema. It clarifies 'force' and 'locales' but does not explain 'fieldType', 'variantId', 'iapProductId', which are critical for correct invocation.

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 starts an async AI translation job for a single metadata field into target locales. It distinguishes from siblings like translate_screenshot_texts or translate_release_notes by specifying 'one metadata field'.

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?

Describes caching behavior, the force flag, and daily caps, which guide usage. Implicitly indicates it's for individual field translation, but lacks explicit alternative mentions or exclusion of bulk operation.

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