translate_term

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the tool translates and returns information, but does not specify read-only nature, error handling, or permissions needed. This lack of side-effect and constraint information reduces transparency.

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 concise (around 80 words) and well-structured with a clear first sentence defining the tool's purpose, followed by a docstring-style breakdown of arguments and return value. No redundant or irrelevant information.

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?

The tool is simple, and the description covers basic functionality and parameters. However, it lacks context on edge cases (e.g., term not found), behavior for invalid inputs, and whether the operation is safe. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values, but completeness is only moderate given these gaps.

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?

The input schema has 0% parameter description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: 'term' is the term to translate (English or Korean), and 'from_lang'/'to_lang' accept 'en' or 'ko' with defaults. This adds value beyond the schema's minimal titles and types.

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 action: 'Translate a shipbuilding term between English and Korean.' This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_term_detail or search_ship_terms, which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage for translation tasks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, such as get_term_detail for term details or search_ship_terms for broader searches. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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