steam_get_app_overview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Fetched live from Steam' discloses that data is real-time and not cached, and the aggregation framing implies a read-only operation. However, it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, latency, or error behavior for an invalid AppID.

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 with zero filler. The scope of the returned data comes first, then the routing guidance, so the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description still enumerates the covered data domains. Combined with explicit sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 there is a single parameter, so the schema already explains the AppID-or-name format and the preference for AppIDs from steam_search_apps. The description adds no parameter guidance beyond what the schema states, which is the expected baseline.

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 a specific verb and resource ('one-call health check for a Steam game') and enumerates the exact payload: current players, review summary, price, release info, genres, news headlines. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling detail tools without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('how is X doing' questions, start here) and names the alternatives (steam_get_app_reviews, steam_get_game_news) with the condition that selects them ('only when the user needs detail'). Routing is fully specified.

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