get_file_formats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the scope of listing supported formats for import and export, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as return structure or potential variability. This is acceptable for a simple zero-parameter read operation.

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 two short sentences with no redundancy. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the explicit note about parameters adds a small but relevant operational detail without wasting space.

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 zero-parameter, read-only, idempotent list tool, the description covers everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly. No output schema is present, but the phrase 'list all file formats' sufficiently communicates the expected result type. Sibling tool context does not reveal any missing prerequisites or caveats.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema already fully defines the input contract. The description reinforces this with 'No parameters required', which is helpful for an agent deciding whether any setup is needed. With no parameters to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and a clear resource ('file formats supported for import and export in SimpleLocalize'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle translations, projects, or tags, so an agent can tell what this tool does without opening the schema.

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 the tool is used when an agent needs to know which file formats are supported for import/export, especially before using import_translations or export_translations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusion guidance, leaving usage context implied rather than stated.

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