steam_search_results

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is credential-free and returns specific fields. However, it does not mention error behavior, rate limits, or whether it is read-only. The term 'Faceted' is mentioned but not explained. For a tool without annotations, this is adequate but could be more detailed.

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 main purpose. It is concise and without redundancy. Each sentence provides useful information (search, pagination, authentication). It could be slightly more structured but is effective.

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?

Given moderate complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description partially explains return values but omits details like default pagination size, allowed sort_by values, and how faceting works. It is adequate for simple use but incomplete for advanced usage scenarios.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds limited value beyond the schema: it mentions 'start/count paging and sort_by' (already in schema) and lists return fields (not in schema). It does not add syntax, defaults, or constraints for individual parameters.

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 clearly states it is a 'Faceted, paginated Steam store search' and lists the returned fields (appid, title, release date, etc.). It identifies the resource (Steam store) and the action (search with pagination and sorting). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'steam_search' or 'steam_app', which may also search or retrieve Steam data.

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 description mentions pagination (start/count), sorting (sort_by), and that it is 'credential-free'. It implies usage for public Steam store searches but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor does it specify when not to use this tool.

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