Searches the YouGame documentation (the publish guide and the SDK reference) and returns matching sections with ids. Use it to answer a specific question — how scores are posted, what multiplayer guarantees, what breaks a build — without reading a whole document, then call fetch with an id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | What to look for, e.g. "submit a score" or "Unity compression" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so no safety disclosure is needed. The description adds behavioral context by naming the exact document set and the output shape (matching sections with ids), and explicitly defines the follow-up fetch call.
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 sentences with no filler. The first sentence is front-loaded with action, scope, and result; the second provides usage criteria and a concrete follow-up instruction.
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?
For a one-parameter, read-only search tool, the description covers the search scope, the output format, when to use it, and the next action. No output schema exists, but 'matching sections with ids' is sufficient for an agent to use the results correctly.
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 schema covers the single query parameter 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving natural-language question examples ('how scores are posted, what multiplayer guarantees, what breaks a build') and clarifying that the query should represent a specific question, which helps the agent formulate effective queries.
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 states a specific verb ('Searches'), a precise resource ('the YouGame documentation (the publish guide and the SDK reference)'), and the output ('returns matching sections with ids'). It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling document readers like get_publish_guide or get_sdk_reference by framing it as targeted search.
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?
It explicitly says to use it 'to answer a specific question' and contrasts with 'without reading a whole document', implying when whole guides are needed the sibling get_* tools are appropriate. It also routes the agent to call 'fetch with an id' afterward, naming the next step.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The tools separate into clear workflows: documentation lookup (search/fetch/get_publish_guide/get_sdk_reference), build validation, and the publishing lifecycle (prepare_submission, publish_game, update_game), so most purposes are unambiguous. The four documentation tools overlap somewhat, though their descriptions distinguish browsing a full document from fetching a specific section.
Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_build, prepare_submission, publish_game, update_game), and the documentation tools consistently use get_. Minor deviations like the bare verbs fetch and search and the noun-phrase my_games keep it from being perfectly uniform.
Nine tools is well within the ideal range, and each tool occupies a clear place in the YouGame workflow: documentation, build checking, submission, publishing, updating, and listing published games. No tool feels redundant or superfluous.
The set covers the full lifecycle from build validation to draft review to live publication and version updates, plus documentation search and a way to list existing games. Missing operations like unpublishing/deleting a game or retrieving details for a single game are minor gaps that can be worked around with my_games and the review-link flow.