Polylang Post-Sprache setzen

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the operation without detailing side effects, error conditions (e.g., invalid language slug), whether existing translations are overwritten, or if the Polylang plugin must be active. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 with no unnecessary words. It 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?

The tool is relatively low complexity (2 required params, no output schema), but the description lacks behavioral context such as prerequisites, consequences, or error handling. Given no annotations, more depth would be beneficial, but the current state is minimally viable for a simple setter.

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%—both postId and language have clear descriptions ('Post-ID' and 'Sprach-Slug (z.B. de, en, fr)'). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description 'Setzt die Sprache eines Posts' clearly states the action (set) and resource (a post's language). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like polylang_get_post_language (which retrieves a language) and polylang_list_languages (which lists available languages).

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 usage: to set a post's language, use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives (e.g., polylang_link_translations) or mention any exclusions or prerequisites. Guidance is minimal but inferable.

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