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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description goes beyond them by disclosing the result shape — platform, page URL, and loose/complete/sealed prices — which is valuable given there is no output schema.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the search scope front-loaded before the result payload. Nothing redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains what each match returns, and annotations cover the safety profile. Only minor gaps remain, such as not mentioning pagination behavior, which the schema already documents via the page parameter.

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 100%, so the query, platform, currency and page parameters are already documented with examples. The description only restates that the search is by name and may span all platforms or one, adding little beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Find video games by name') with the scope of the search ('on every platform or one'). It is clearly distinguishable from browse_platform and list_platforms, though it doesn't explicitly name get_game_prices as the price-detail alternative.

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 'on every platform or one' implies when to pass the platform parameter, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to the siblings get_game_prices or browse_platform. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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