Format locale files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavior beyond that: preview-by-default semantics and the scope nuance that mixed files only get top-level key sorting. It stops short of describing what the preview output looks like, but that is a minor gap given the 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?

Two tightly packed sentences with no filler; the operation comes first and the safe-by-default behavior is stated immediately after. Every clause carries 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?

For a 4-parameter, zero-required mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential decision points (default preview, explicit opt-in to write, key sorting scope). It leaves unstated whether files must exist and what the preview reports, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the dryRun explanation largely restates the schema description. The description nonetheless adds a semantic the schema lacks: sorting is limited to top level for mixed files, which clarifies the sortKeys parameter's real scope.

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?

States specific verbs and effect: 'Normalize JSON formatting and sort keys', which clearly identifies a formatting/rewriting tool for locale resources. It does not name or contrast with any sibling tool, but the purpose is unambiguous and distinct from the search/translation siblings.

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 gives clear guidance on the dryRun default ('Previews by default; pass dryRun:false to rewrite'), which tells the agent how to actually apply changes. However, it offers no when-to-use-vs-alternative guidance and no mention of preconditions or when formatting is appropriate relative to i18n_audit or i18n_upsert_translations.

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