list_all_translations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says 'List all units,' omitting read-only status, pagination behavior, ordering, authentication needs, and return format, which are all relevant for a tool with page and pageSize parameters.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. Given the tool's three parameters and lack of annotations, it does not earn its brevity by covering essential 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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool confidently. It omits what the translation file is scoped to, how pagination works, and what the results contain.

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 description coverage is only 33%, so the description should compensate for the undocumented page and pageSize parameters, but it does not. It also adds no meaning beyond the schema for the required locale parameter, leaving parameter usage largely unclear.

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 states a clear verb (List) and resource (units in the translation file), making the core action understandable. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like list_new_translations or extract_i18n, leaving scope ambiguity.

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. Sibling names imply overlapping listing/extraction tools, but the description offers no conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites to guide selection.

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