list_localizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the version-level scoping detail; it says nothing about pagination behavior (the next/limit params imply paged results) or result ordering, which is what an agent would still need.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of the parameter and pagination detail noted elsewhere.

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 list tool with three undocumented parameters, no output schema, and paginated results, one sentence is not enough. An agent cannot tell from the description what a returned localization contains or how to page through results.

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 0% for three parameters, so the description carries the full burden and mostly fails: it never mentions that versionId is required, nor explains limit (1-200) or the next pagination cursor. The phrase 'version-level' only weakly hints at versionId, leaving two of three params entirely unaddressed.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (App Store metadata localizations) with a scope qualifier ('version-level') that distinguishes it from the sibling list_app_info_localizations. It stops short of naming the sibling or contrasting the two explicitly, so it is clear but not fully differentiating.

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 'version-level' qualifier implies when to use this over the app-info-level localization tools, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not statement, and no mention of what must exist first (a version, a valid versionId). Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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