auto_translate_text

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

Adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: the operation is synchronous, does not persist to the project, and is intended for ad-hoc/preview use. It doesn't mention costs, rate limits, or external side effects, but annotations already signal open-world behavior and non-destructiveness.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded: the core behavior is stated first, followed by required parameters, optional parameters, and usage guidance. Bullets make scanning easy, and every sentence earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what is needed to invoke it correctly: required inputs, optional inputs, and the sibling tool for the saving variant. The only minor gap is not explicitly stating the return format, which is largely implied by 'translate'.

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 description adds modest value by grouping required vs optional parameters, enumerating provider options, and giving a concrete example for targetLanguage. It doesn't deeply explain every parameter, but the schema already covers that.

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 the exact operation with a specific verb and resource: auto-translate a single piece of text synchronously without saving it. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling create_auto_translation_jobs by noting the 'no save' behavior.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Use this to preview a translation or translate ad-hoc text.' It also names the alternative tool to use when saving is needed: create_auto_translation_jobs. This is direct, actionable guidance.

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