app_locale_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds the meaningful constraint that full-asset mode works for exactly one languageCode, but it never explains what 'compact metadata' vs 'full assets' actually contain or how the report-style parameters behave for this endpoint.

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 sentence, zero filler, with the primary mode stated first and the alternate mode immediately after. Nothing to trim.

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?

Rich structured data (100% schema coverage, output schema, read-only annotations) means the description needn't explain returns or safety. But for a 12-parameter tool it leaves the agent guessing about sibling choice and about how the generic report-style parameters apply to a locale lookup.

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%, so baseline is 3; the description earns a nudge above baseline by making explicit the conditional relationship between languageCode and includeAssets that is only scattered across individual field descriptions. It still does not clarify why report parameters like timeRange, groupBy, filters or sorting exist on a locale endpoint.

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 ('Query compact locale metadata, or full assets') and distinguishes its two operating modes. However, it does not differentiate itself from similarly-purposed siblings such as product_page_locales and supported_app_languages, leaving the agent to infer which locale source to use.

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 two modes are implied: default returns compact metadata, while supplying a languageCode with includeAssets returns full assets. There is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance and no mention of the alternative locale-related tools, so routing relies on inference.

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