Show Localization

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds genuinely useful context by spelling out the required token permission scopes ('Read all data' / delegated contact permissions), but says nothing about error behavior or response shape. Adds value beyond annotations without being rich.

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 purpose sentence is properly front-loaded and the auth requirements are relevant, but roughly two-thirds of the text is permission boilerplate restating scopes and the closing 'Read-only account operation' is redundant with readOnlyHint=true. Reasonably sized but not tight.

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 simple read-only getter with no output schema, the description plus annotations cover the essentials: what it returns (details of one localization), how to authenticate, and the safety profile. It lacks any hint about response contents (e.g., transcript flag implications), which is a minor gap rather than a blocker.

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 four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the optional include_transcript flag and the account credential selector. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Obtain detailed information about a localization.' This clearly signals single-item retrieval and, combined with the required media/localization IDs, distinguishes it from list_localizations and create/delete_localization. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives like list_localizations or get_media. An agent must infer that this is the single-localization read path purely from the name.

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