List Section Translations

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds crucial behavioral context: it returns per-locale flags for description and published status, and clarifies the subtle draft-vs-missing distinction that list_sections cannot reveal. No contradictions with annotations.

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 first sentence is concise and front-loaded. The second sentence is long but packed with necessary edge-case reasoning and alternative tool guidance. No filler, but the density could be slightly trimmed without losing 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 no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns (for each locale: name, description-set flag, published/draft) and how to interpret it. It also covers edge cases and corrective actions, making it contextually complete for a list operation.

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%; the only parameter (section_id) is fully documented with its type, source, and how to obtain it. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, which matches the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 that the tool lists translations of a Help Center section with details per locale (localized name, description set?, published/draft). It also distinguishes itself from list_sections and other related translation tools, making its purpose 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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool ('when a section looks wrong in a locale'), explains why the alternative list_sections is insufficient, and points to set_section_translation and find_translation_gaps for related actions. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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