search_games

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose non-obvious traits: the Vue native value setter requirement, that /games?search= silently fails to filter, and that #platforms-search must never be typed into. It omits auth expectations, rate limits, and how wait_ms affects behavior.

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?

Front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, then delivers compact operational bullets with no filler. Slightly terse for the amount of parameter ground it should cover.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the description usefully covers the search mechanism. However, with two parameters at 0% description coverage and no annotations, key calling details (query meaning, wait_ms effect) remain unaddressed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does not. It alludes to a search field but never names or explains the required `query` parameter, and `wait_ms` is entirely unaddressed in both schema and description.

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 ("Search the Infinite Backlog games catalog") plus the return shape ("return page text"). It is clear but does not differentiate itself from browser-control siblings like run_browser_use_task or get_page_text, which also can act on a page.

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?

Provides strong operational guidance for executing the search (Vue native value setter, live filter param /games?q=, and a negative rule about #platforms-search), but gives no when-to-use-this-vs-an-alternative framing relative to siblings such as run_browser_use_task or open_site. Usage is implied through mechanics rather than stated via alternatives.

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