Community or personal logs for a game

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the description adds value by detailing the username behavior (full log history including every replay) and the optional filters (friends-only, rating). No contradiction with annotations; the idempotentHint false is not addressed but doesn't conflict.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and each sentence provides necessary information. No redundancy or filler.

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 read-only list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the main modes and filters. It doesn't mention pagination, but the schema documents the page parameter. The 'every replay' detail adds useful context for the username variant.

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 covers 60% of parameters, but the description adds meaning to the undocumented ones: 'friends-only' and 'filtered by rating' clarify the boolean and numeric params. It also elaborates username semantics ('full log history', 'every replay') beyond the schema's 'instead of community logs'.

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 returns community logs for a game, with optional friends-only or rating filters, and supports username-based personal logs. This specific verb+resource ('Logs of a game') distinguishes it from other tools like get_game or get_my_game_log.

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 explains when to use the tool: for community logs, or with username for one person's full log history. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is clear enough for a straightforward read operation.

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