[Write] Update an App Info localization

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently reveals that updates are partial (only supplied fields change) and that dryRun previews changes as an old → new diff, which goes beyond simple mutation semantics. It stops short of detailing permissions, reversibility, or return values, but the core behaviors are well covered.

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 compact: two sentences that front-load the verb 'Write' and immediately state the update semantics and dryRun capability. Every sentence contributes value without redundant filler.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides a solid overview: partial update, field list, and dryRun behavior. However, it omits what the non-dryRun response looks like and does not discuss error conditions or prerequisites beyond 'existing locale', leaving some gaps for a comprehensive understanding.

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 50%, so the description compensates by explicitly listing the updatable fields (name, subtitle, privacy policy URL/text, privacy choices URL) and clarifying the dryRun parameter's diff behavior. While not every parameter gets a detailed explanation, the grouping and dryRun description add meaningful context beyond the raw 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Partially updates') and resource ('app-level localized fields'), enumerating the exact fields (name, subtitle, privacy policy URL/text, privacy choices URL) and scope ('for an existing locale'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create or get.

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 phrase 'for an existing locale' implies when to use this tool (updating an existing localization) versus creating a new one, and the dryRun feature is mentioned as a preview option. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusionary guidance.

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