steam_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only names three aspects—status, queue, progress—and does not state whether the operation is read-only, whether Steam must be running, how appid alters behavior, or what the response contains.

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 text is short and free of filler, but it is an under-specified fragment rather than a concise explanation. It does not form a complete sentence and fails to earn its place by adding behavioral or parameter context.

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 two-parameter, multi-mode tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is too incomplete. Key context such as when appid is required, what each action returns, and how this tool relates to siblings is missing, so an agent cannot reliably invoke it 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 0%, so the description needed to document appid and action, but it only loosely mirrors the action enum. The appid parameter is entirely unexplained, and no defaults, formats, or relationships between parameters are added beyond what the schema already exposes.

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 identifies a resource and possible areas of interest—Steam client status, download queue, and download progress—but it lacks a verb such as 'get' or 'show,' so it is unclear whether the tool reads state or acts on it. It also does not differentiate this tool from siblings like diagnostics or game_control.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of related sibling tools. No exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided, and the agent must infer usage context from the action enum and tool name.

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