steam_steamspy

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It notes the data is estimates, credential-free, and public JSON. However, it does not mention error handling, rate limits, or what happens with invalid appids. The disclosure about estimates is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and no wasted words. Every sentence adds essential context: what it returns, that it's third-party, and that it requires no credentials.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and data source. However, it lacks information about the return structure (e.g., JSON fields) or an example, which would help the agent fully utilize the response.

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 only parameter 'appid' has a schema description 'Numeric Steam app id' with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no further detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves SteamSpy third-party estimates (ownership, playtime, etc.) for a Steam app. It distinguishes itself from official Steam data and among many Steam-related siblings, this is the only one explicitly mentioning SteamSpy.

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 emphasizes these are 'SteamSpy estimates, not official Steam figures,' implying when to prefer this tool (when third-party estimates are acceptable) and when not (when official data is needed). It does not name specific alternative tools but the context is clear.

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