toggle_auto_translate

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full burden. It labels the tool as '[mutation]' and says 'Activar/desactivar', but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, reversibility, or impact on existing messages. Minimal transparency beyond the basic action.

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?

Description is very short: two sentences, no fluff. Front-loads the action and object. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate purpose from scope). Remains appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple tool with one boolean param and no output schema, description covers basic functionality. But it lacks context: what setting is toggled (account-wide?), language of description (Spanish) may hinder non-Spanish agents, and no mention of return value or confirmation. Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 100% (one boolean parameter fully described). The tool description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema already provides; the parameter description in schema is identical in substance. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description uses clear verb 'Activar/desactivar' and resource 'traduccion automatica de mensajes'. It specifies the action (toggle) and object (automatic translation of messages), distinguishing it from sibling toggle tools like 'toggle_analytics' or 'toggle_auto_describe_images'. However, it could be more precise about the scope (e.g., global or per conversation).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., specific toggles for other features). No mention of prerequisites, constraints, or when not to use it. The description lacks any usage context to aid decision-making.

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