list_games

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'with pagination', which hints at output structure, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what the response looks like (e.g., format, fields). This is inadequate for a tool with 10 parameters and no output schema.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality ('List and filter games') and includes key scope ('with pagination'). There is no wasted verbiage, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like pagination mechanics. For a list/filter tool with many options, more context is needed to guide effective 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value by implying filtering capabilities but doesn't provide additional context beyond what the schema offers, such as examples or usage tips for parameters like 'runner' or 'service'.

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 action ('List and filter') and resource ('games in the Lutris library'), with the addition of 'with pagination' providing scope. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_service_games' or 'get_game', which could offer overlapping functionality.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_service_games' or 'get_game', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for filtering. Usage is implied through the mention of filtering and pagination, but explicit comparisons are absent.

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