Get owned games

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it requires specific API key and visibility settings, and indicates the result ordering (most-played first). This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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, each contributing essential information: the action and output format, required permissions, and a necessary precursor step. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description explains the output includes game names and playtime in hours, but lacks details such as whether the game ID is included, how pagination works, or the exact structure of the response. Without an output schema, this information would help an agent process the results.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter, but the tool description further explains how to obtain the SteamID64 using resolve_vanity_url. This adds practical guidance that the schema alone does not provide.

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 what the tool does: 'List the games a player owns with playtime (hours), most-played first.' It identifies a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_wishlist or get_recently_played, leaving some ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 provides usage context, including requirements (STEAM_API_KEY, public profile, game-details visibility) and a prerequisite step (resolve_vanity_url). However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when the player ID is already known or when only recently played games are needed.

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