beta_build_localizations__build__get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'Read' which aligns with annotations, but does not provide additional behavioral context beyond what annotations already convey.

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 one sentence plus the HTTP path, which is concise and front-loaded. No unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more informative.

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?

Given the simple one-parameter GET and annotations covering safety, the description is somewhat complete but lacks detail on the return value (no output schema) and prerequisites. Adequate but could mention that it returns a Build resource.

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 describes the 'id' parameter as 'Resource identifier' which is vague. The tool description does not add any further semantic meaning, such as specifying that it's the beta build localization ID. Despite 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal value.

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 action ('Read') and the resource ('the build for a beta build localization'). The HTTP path indicates it's a GET. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's for beta build localizations.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. The usage is implied (when you have a beta build localization id), but no guidance on when not to use it or what alternative tools exist (e.g., builds__get).

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