Get game details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the scope of 'one game' and the inclusion of 'your own log entry', which is valuable context beyond the structured annotations. No contradiction.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Full metadata for one game') and then enumerates the contents. Every word contributes, with no extraneous information.

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 tool's simplicity, the detailed schema, and annotations, the description fully conveys what the agent can expect. It specifies the output contents (metadata + personal log) and aligns with the read-only behavior. No output schema is needed.

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% and the schema already describes both `game` (title, slug, or ID) and `include_my_log` (rating, shelf, playthroughs, review). The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning beyond what is in the schema.

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 full metadata for one game, listing specific fields and adding 'your own log entry'. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_games (looking up games) or get_games_metadata (plural metadata).

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: it's for fetching a single game's details with optional personal log. Does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like get_game_reviews or get_my_game_log, so lacks exclusion/alternative guidance.

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