List Category Translations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, but the description adds critical behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the subtle draft-versus-published distinction and how list_categories can mislead (omitting untranslated categories or listing draft names). This enriches the agent's understanding of what the tool reveals.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides usage rationale and alternatives, with every sentence contributing value. Though longer than typical, the complexity of the draft/published pitfall justifies the length. No wasted words.

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 tool's moderate complexity and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains returned fields, the key behavioral nuance, and how it fits with siblings. The agent has all necessary context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100% for the single parameter category_id, including how to obtain it. The description adds no additional parameter detail, so it neither helps nor hurts. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already carries the full parameter burden.

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's function: 'List the translations of a Help Center category' and specifies the exact output attributes (localized name, description set, published/draft). It explicitly contrasts with sibling tools like list_categories and find_translation_gaps, making the purpose distinct and unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Reach for this when a category looks wrong in a locale' and explains why list_categories is insufficient. It also names alternatives and follow-ups: 'Fix either case with set_category_translation; to sweep every category and section at once, use find_translation_gaps.' This fully covers when/when-not/alternatives.

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