list_cultures

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only', disclosing that no mutation occurs, and it clarifies the content of the output (name, translation count, linguistic metadata). This adds useful behavioral context beyond the basic listing operation.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the action, resource, and output details without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only list tool, the description provides sufficient detail about what is returned and the read-only behavior. It lacks a note on the sessionId parameter but overall the tool is simple enough that the description is nearly complete.

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 schema has one required parameter, sessionId, with zero description coverage. The description does not mention sessionId or explain how it is used to select the model or how it relates to the listed cultures. The parameter name is self-evident but the description adds no guidance on its purpose or format.

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 lists the model's cultures (locales) and specifies the exact fields returned: name, translation count, and linguistic metadata indicator. The verb 'List' plus the resource 'model's cultures' makes the purpose unmistakable and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_translations.

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 for inspecting cultures but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The read-only nature is noted, but there is no guidance on selecting a session or model.

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