publish_locale

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of describing behavior, but it only states the immediate effect. It does not disclose any prerequisites (e.g., locale existence), reversibility, or side effects, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and purpose. It contains no redundant information and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not mention error conditions, relationship to other locale tools, or workflow steps, leaving some gaps in contextual completeness.

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 only parameter 'locale' is fully described in the schema ('Locale code to publish'), and the description adds no additional parameter-level detail. With 100% schema description coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the action 'Publish a locale' and the outcome 'make it available on the storefront'. This distinguishes it from siblings like unpublish_locale, with a specific verb and resource.

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 implies use when you want to publish a locale to the storefront, but offers no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions, so guidance is merely implied.

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