datasets_steam_achievements_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavior disclosure. It transparently defines the one-document-per-appid×achievement structure and clarifies sort semantics (most-unlocked vs rarest first). It does not describe pagination behavior or return format, but those are partially covered by the schema's page/page_size descriptions.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every clause adds value: dataset scope, document model, app_id usage, and sort semantics with defaults. No filler or redundancy with schema fields.

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?

The description adequately covers the main search use case with document granularity and sort defaults. It does not explicitly state behavior when app_id is absent or list return fields, but given only four simple optional parameters and no output schema, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantic value by specifying that app_id triggers listing a game's achievements and by elaborating the sort enum: percent_desc = most-unlocked first, percent_asc = rarest first, rank_asc. This goes beyond the schema's bare enum listing.

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 opens with 'Search steam-achievements dataset' and specifies the exact data content: 'per-game global achievement unlock percentages (one document per appid × achievement)'. This clearly identifies the resource and its granularity, distinguishing it from sibling dataset tools like datasets_steam_playercounts_search and datasets_steam_reviews_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 provides concrete usage guidance: 'Pass `app_id` to list a game's achievements' and explains the three sort options with their meanings and default. However, it does not mention when to prefer this tool over other Steam-related dataset tools or what happens when app_id is omitted.

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