get_translation_keys

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: exact-match case-sensitive filtering, supported sort fields, and pagination defaults/caps. This is more than minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 compact and front-loaded: main purpose first, then options and routing guidance in clean bullets. Every sentence adds value without redundant restatement of the schema.

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-required-parameter read operation, the description covers filters, sorting, pagination defaults, maximums, and the key sibling alternative. Without an output schema, it still provides enough context for correct invocation and selection.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that key and namespace filters are exact match and case sensitive, which is not present in the schema. Other parameter details mostly restate schema but with useful invocation context.

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 verb and resource: return translation keys with full metadata for a SimpleLocalize project. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_all_translation_keys by naming metadata and pagination as its differentiators.

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?

Final bullet gives direct routing guidance: use this instead of get_all_translation_keys when metadata or pagination is needed. It also lists optional filters and sort options, so an agent can decide when to invoke this tool versus alternatives.

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