Get prices for many games

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: 'No API key required' (aligns with openWorld), and describes output fields (final/initial price, discount_percent, is_free). It provides clarity on what to expect beyond 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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose and key benefit ('efficient for checking a whole list'). Each sentence adds value: what it does, output details, and prerequisite steps.

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 simple batch read tool with 2 parameters, the description is fairly complete. It mentions output fields despite no output schema. Could optionally include rate limits or error cases, but this is not necessary for typical use.

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 descriptions already cover both parameters comprehensively (appids range 1-500, country pattern). The description adds only a suggestion to get appids from other tools, which is usage guidance rather than parameter detail. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 it gets current prices and discounts for a batch of games by appid. It specifies the verb 'Get' and resources 'current price and discount', differentiating from sibling tools like discover_deals or get_specials by emphasizing batch efficiency for lists like wishlists.

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 advises using this when checking a whole list (e.g., a wishlist) and directs users to get appids from search_games or get_wishlist. It implies efficiency for batch lookups but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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