Get ModDB mod info

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe, non-mutating read, so the bar is lower. The description usefully adds that the data is public and what the response contains, but says nothing about rate limits, not-found behavior, or how release pagination interacts with the limit.

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 tight sentences, the resource and payload front-loaded, and the accepted identifier forms last. No filler or repetition of the title.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the job of describing return contents (ids, tags, links, stats, releases with versions). It is nearly sufficient for a read tool with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, though error/empty-result behavior is unaddressed.

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%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema with examples ('carrycapacity', '5894', '/show/mod/54807'). The description's 'name, numeric id, or URL alias' merely echoes that, adding no new format or constraint detail; baseline 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 gives a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('a mod's public ModDB metadata') and enumerates the returned payload (ids, tags, links, stats, release list). That is far more informative than a restated title, though it never names a sibling such as list_my_mods or update_mod to sharpen the boundary.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the lookup tool for a single mod, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative (e.g. list_my_mods for the caller's own mods). The identifier-flexibility sentence is parameter help, not routing guidance.

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