optimizer_chooseChoose the listing option to ship and define core phrases that must remain in every locale before localization.
Pick the listing option to ship and the core phrases it must carry into every locale. Next step: optimizer_localize.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| optionId | Yes | Chosen option id. | |
| projectId | Yes | Project id (from get_overview). | |
| corePhrases | Yes | Main-locale phrases to keep in every locale. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this as a non-destructive, idempotent mutation in a closed world. The description adds that the chosen core phrases are carried into every locale, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not explain what happens to any prior selection or what the response looks like.
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?
Two short sentences with zero filler, and the main action is front-loaded. The sequencing note is compact and useful.
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?
The description is adequate for a simple three-parameter mutation, especially since the schema fully documents inputs. It still omits what happens after selection, such as any state change or what is returned, which would help an agent understand the full effect of calling it.
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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the meaning of optionId and corePhrases but adds no syntax, formatting, or constraint details beyond the schema.
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: picking a listing option and its core phrases for shipping into every locale. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like optimizer_save_option or optimizer_more_options.
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?
It gives a clear next step (optimizer_localize), which implies this is part of a sequence. However, it does not say when to choose this tool over alternatives or what preconditions must be met before calling it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.