Get game details

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

The description adds value beyond annotations: it explains the name resolution logic (closest store match) and that no API key is required. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description does not contradict annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action and details. Every sentence adds value: first sentence lists included data, second explains identification, third notes no API key. No superfluous words.

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 no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields (description, price/discount, genres, etc.), which is sufficient. It explains input resolution for appid and name. It does not cover error cases or environment variable overrides, but those are covered in schema. Overall, it is fairly complete for a read-only single-game info tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal additional meaning: it reiterates the appid/name relationship and that appid wins. The schema already includes parameter descriptions including override behavior for country and language. No significant new information is provided.

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 explicitly states 'Get full store details for one game' and enumerates the details (description, price/discount, genres, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_games and get_prices by clarifying the identification methods (appid from search_games or name).

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 clearly indicates when to use: to retrieve comprehensive store details for a single game. It provides guidance on identification via appid (from search_games) or name, and notes that appid takes precedence. It also mentions the absence of API key requirement, aiding in decision-making.

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