language_detection_guide

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

The description labels the tool as 'DEMO', indicating incomplete functionality, and as a 'Guide', implying read-only behavior. However, with no annotations, it fails to disclose any side effects, permissions, or further behavioral traits such as what happens when 'text_sample' is provided.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it is too sparse to be considered effectively concise. While it avoids verbosity, it sacrifices necessary detail.

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 has an output schema and one optional parameter, the description should clarify what the guide covers, how the input affects the output, and the significance of the 'DEMO' label. It fails to provide sufficient context for reliable use.

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 0% and the description does not mention the single parameter 'text_sample' at all, providing no guidance on its purpose or format. The description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 it is a guide to language detection and translation for Kenya, which is somewhat clear but vague. It distinguishes from sibling language-specific guides like 'kikuyu_language_guide' by being a general resource, but lacks specificity about what the tool actually does.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent without contextual direction.

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