localize

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys that this is a query operation and explains the key format, but it does not mention behavior such as handling of unknown keys, locale nuances, or side effects. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to explain return values.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that states the action, the parameter meaning, and an example with no filler. Every word contributes to the agent's understanding and call construction.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it gives the required input format and an example. Minor gaps remain, such as what the returned localized strings represent or how missing keys are handled, but the output schema likely covers return structure.

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%, so the description must compensate. It fully defines the meaning of the only parameter 'keys' by specifying comma-separated loc keys and providing a concrete example ('CHI,law_serfdom,ig_landowners'), which goes well beyond the raw schema type of string.

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 a specific action and resource: '查询游戏本地化' (query game localization), and clarifies the input format with an example. It is clearly distinct from the sibling tools, which all concern save/state inspection rather than localization lookup.

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 intended use is implied: call it when you need game localization strings for given loc keys. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or what conditions make it appropriate, though no sibling tool competes with this functionality.

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