get_version_localizations

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

The description implies a read operation via the verb 'retrieve', but does not explicitly state that it is read-only or disclose any side effects, permissions, or dependencies. Given the absence of annotations, the description carries the burden but provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic function.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently outlines what is returned (description, keywords, etc.). However, it could be more complete by listing all possible fields or confirming the return format.

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?

Both the input schema and the description cover the single parameter 'versionId'. The schema already provides the description referencing 'list_app_versions', so the tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond that. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 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 clearly states the tool retrieves version localization information such as descriptions and keywords. It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('version localization'), and implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'update_version_localization' which is the write counterpart.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_app_info' or 'update_version_localization'. It does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it.

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