list_app_info_localizations

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read operation ('List all...') and specifies return fields, implying no side effects. However, it does not explicitly guarantee idempotency or mention permissions, but the intent is clear enough.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and outcome, making it easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and return fields but omits details about the optional 'locale' filter (only in schema), pagination, error conditions, or output structure. Without an output schema, more context would be helpful for 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters; it only mentions return values. No parameter details or clarifications are added.

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 purpose: listing all app info localizations for a given app info. It specifies the returned data (localization IDs and values for name, subtitle, privacy policy), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_app_info_localization' or 'update_app_info_localization'.

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 the tool should be used to retrieve existing localizations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_app_info' for single info, or 'create_app_info_localization' for adding). No usage context or exclusions are provided.

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