Get prices for many games

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

Discloses that rows preserve input order, unavailable games are marked with available:false, output includes price/discount/is_free, and no API key required. Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world, so no contradiction.

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?

Two paragraphs, front-loaded with main purpose, followed by essential details. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy or fluff.

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 2-parameter tool with output schema present, the description covers purpose, usage, param limits, behavioral guarantees, return format, and data source. Fully adequate given complexity and existing structured fields.

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 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond usage context; the ordering guarantee pertains to output, not parameter meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gets current price and discount for a batch of games by appid, explicitly contrasting with get_items for when more data is needed. Purpose is specific and distinct from siblings.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (efficient batch price checking for wishlists), when not to use (if needing review %, etc., use get_items), limits (max 500 appids), and source for appids (search_games or get_wishlist).

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