beta_build_localizations__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' consistent with annotations. No additional behavioral traits such as permission requirements or response format are disclosed, but given annotation coverage, the description is adequate.

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 sentence plus the endpoint, no redundant or unnecessary words. It is efficiently front-loaded with purpose.

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 operation with comprehensive annotations, the description is sufficient. It provides the purpose and endpoint. No output schema exists, so return details are not expected.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters (id, include) with descriptions. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Read one beta build localization by ID' which specifies the verb and resource. The endpoint is also provided. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, delete, list, update, and build__get.

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 identifies the tool for reading a single localization by ID but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives (e.g., list for multiple, build__get to retrieve the associated build). The usage context is implied but not elaborated.

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