openai_create_realtime_translation_secret

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the entire behavioral burden, and it discloses little beyond the fact that the secret is short-lived. It does not state auth requirements, what the caller should do with the returned secret, whether creation is idempotent or revocable, or how expiry interacts with sessions.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and wastes no words, which is good. But its brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined economy, so it does not fully earn the terseness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for a secret-creation tool with zero annotation coverage and an opaque required JSON parameter, the definition leaves out critical call-construction and behavioral detail an agent needs.

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% across three parameters, including a required 'session_json' string whose expected shape is entirely undocumented. The description adds no meaning to session_json, safety_identifier, or expires_in_seconds, so an agent cannot construct a valid call from the definition alone.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource: 'Create a short-lived client secret for the Realtime Translation API.' That is clearly more informative than a tautology and hints at the translation-specific scope. However, it never distinguishes this from the near-identical sibling openai_create_realtime_client_secret, leaving the agent to infer which one to call.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling openai_create_realtime_client_secret or openai_create_live_session, and no prerequisites are listed. The only implied context is that it relates to the Realtime Translation API, which is incidental rather than directive.

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