Get a player's ban status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the ban status is always public and requires a Steam API key. 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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and scope, then adds a key differentiator and auth requirement. 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?

Given the output schema exists and the tool has a single optional parameter, the description covers purpose, usage context, public behavior, and auth requirements. Minor gaps like rate limits or error handling are acceptable for a simple read-only 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%, and the parameter description for 'steamid' is already detailed (17-digit, optional, server default, vanity resolution). The tool description only restates 'by SteamID64' without adding new parameter-specific insights, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 checks a player's ban status, enumerating specific ban types (VAC, game, community, economy) and the resource (SteamID64). This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which cover bans.

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 explicitly provides a use case ('useful before trading or adding a friend') and notes that ban status is public even when the profile is private, guiding when to choose this tool. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but no sibling tool offers an alternative for ban status.

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