ControlCenter Sprache anzeigen

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds useful context about the output content (current language and supported codes), but no additional behavioral details such as side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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 direct and front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant or extraneous information.

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 getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately discloses what it returns (current output language and supported language codes). It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's functionality without further elaboration.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Per calibration, 0 parameters receives a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics since none exist.

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 'Zeigt die aktuelle ControlCenter-Ausgabesprache und die unterstützten Sprachcodes' uses a specific verb (zeigt/shows) and names the resource (ControlCenter output language). It clearly differentiates from sibling tool controlcenter_set_language, which presumably modifies the language.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly specify when to use it or how it differs from alternatives. The context of a read-only getter is implied but no exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, leaving usage guidance implicit.

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