Search Translations

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

Despite no annotations, the description clearly discloses the search is a simple case-insensitive substring match, not fuzzy or regex, which is key behavioral information beyond the schema. It implies no destructive side effects, appropriate for a read 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 extremely concise with two sentences, no wasted words, and the core purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 6 parameters (all well-described in schema) and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and use case. It does not explain return format, but for a search tool this is acceptable and the example compensates.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds an example of matching ('save' matches key or value), which is helpful but not significantly beyond the schema's detailed parameter descriptions.

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 searches translation files by key path or value, and specifies it uses a case-insensitive substring match (not fuzzy/regex), effectively distinguishing from potential siblings like 'find_orphan_keys' or 'get_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 mentions the tool is useful for finding existing translations before adding duplicates, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, although sibling tools imply other search functions.

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