[Read] Get one App Info localization

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It states 'Read-only' which is a clear behavioral disclosure, but lacks additional context such as authentication requirements, what fields are included, or error behavior. Some details are implied but not explicit.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information without redundancy. 'Read-only.' is an efficient opening that immediately signals the safe nature of the operation.

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 tool is simple, with only two required parameters and a clear read-op purpose. The description covers the 'get one' aspect, and the schema covers parameters. However, without an output schema, the agent must infer the return shape; mentioning the specific localized fields returned or any potential errors would enhance completeness.

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?

The input schema fully describes both parameters (appId, locale) with descriptions, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Gets') and clearly identifies the resource ('app-level localized fields for a single locale'), distinguishing this from sibling list/update/create operations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like asc_app_info_localizations_list or asc_app_info_localization_update. The 'Read-only' prefix hints at a reading use case but does not give explicit context or exclusions.

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