Search games

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world (public), but the description adds critical behavioral detail: the 'type' caveat, lack of pagination, ~10 result cap, and no API key requirement. This goes well 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?

Every sentence carries essential information: the action, return fields, important caveat about type, pagination limitation, and auth requirement. No filler, well front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool is a search endpoint with moderate complexity; the description covers return fields, limitations, the relationship to sibling tools, and authentication. With an output schema present, return values don't need repeating, making this fully complete.

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 cover all 3 parameters, but the description adds meaningful semantics for 'term' (partial/approximate, not exact match). This exceeds the baseline for high schema coverage and gives the agent the needed search behavior context.

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?

States the exact action ('Search the Steam store by title') and clearly differentiates from siblings by noting it returns appids needed by other game tools, plus the specific fields. This is a specific verb+resource+scope.

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?

Provides clear context for use including partial/approximate matching, pagination limits, and refining query terms. Explicitly points to an alternative (get_game) for obtaining the real type, though it does not explicitly say 'use this when you have a title but not an appid'.

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