Browse the catalogue

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the fact that filters use Backloggd slugs, which is a small behavioral/input detail, but it does not disclose response format, pagination behavior, or rate limits. Given the annotations, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and the second sentence efficiently explains slug usage. No redundant filler; every word earns its place.

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 filter-based browsing tool with no output schema, the description gives a good conceptual model and examples. It would be stronger if it explicitly mentioned pagination or the return format, but the tool is simple and the annotations cover safety. The description is adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 high (80%), and the schema already explains genre and platform slugs. The description reinforces that sort order and filters are the main interaction pattern but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. It slightly clarifies combination of filters through examples, but this is marginal.

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's function: discover games by sort order and filters, explicitly contrasting with title-based search. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_games and get_game, and the examples ('popular RPGs from 2022') illustrate concrete use cases.

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 conveys when to use the tool: when browsing/filtering the catalogue rather than searching by title. It gives illustrative scenarios but does not explicitly name alternative tools like search_games, so it lacks full when-not/alternative guidance.

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