steam_achievements

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

With no annotations, description discloses key behaviors: returns sorted percentages, empty list if no stats, and 'Credential-free public Steam WebAPI JSON' indicating no auth required and response format. Missing details like rate limits or data freshness, but sufficiently transparent.

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?

Three concise sentences: action, return format, and edge case/credential-free note. No wasted words, information-dense.

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?

Covers main functionality and edge case (empty list). No output schema, so return structure is implied but not fully detailed (e.g., fields per achievement). For a simple tool with one param, fairly complete.

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%, baseline 3. Description mentions 'a Steam app' implying appid usage but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's description. Adequate but no enhancement.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Get', resource 'global achievement completion percentages for a Steam app', and scope. Distinguishes from sibling 'datasets_steam_achievements_search' which likely focuses on searching achievements rather than global percentages.

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?

Implies usage for retrieving global achievement stats, but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. other Steam tools or when to prefer the sibling 'datasets_steam_achievements_search'. Provides edge case (empty list) but no exclusions.

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