Steam Storage Commander

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral context by mentioning 'non-destructive' and criteria (size, playtime, recency, backlog, protected tags), but does not disclose detailed behavior beyond that.

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?

A single concise sentence front-loads the main actions and criteria. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy.

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 the complexity (4 parameters, zero required, one enum, output schema exists), the description covers the overall goal but does not detail parameter behavior or output expectations. It is adequate but leaves gaps about how modes use other parameters.

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. The description names some criteria but does not explain the parameters (mode, limit, protectedTags, neededGigabytes) or their relationship to the modes. The enum values for mode (audit, find_large, make_room, uninstall_plan) are only listed in the schema, not described in text.

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 specific actions: 'Audit installed-game storage, find large games, or build a non-destructive make-room/uninstall plan'. It uses strong verbs and resource (storage), and distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on storage management and planning rather than general library listing or stats.

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 implies usage context (storage management) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like steam_get_installed_games or steam_library_stats. No direct guidance on when not to use or prerequisites.

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