app_info_localizations__update

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

Annotations declare it as idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., what gets modified, required permissions, side effects). With annotations present, the description adds minimal value beyond them.

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 very short (one sentence plus endpoint) and front-loaded with the action. It is concise, though it could be improved by including key context.

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?

As an update tool, it lacks description of what fields can be updated (only visible in schema), return behavior, or any nuances. The description is too minimal for an agent to fully understand the tool's scope.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so description need not elaborate. The description does not mention parameters, but the schema already provides sufficient detail.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'app info localization', which directly corresponds to the tool name. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools (create, delete, get) beyond the verb itself, but those siblings are self-explanatory from their names.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about prerequisites, common scenarios, or exclusions is provided.

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