steam_discover

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It adds the personalization behavior and the filter-based scope, but does not disclose deeper behavioral details like unknown-tag handling or ownership exclusion; those are left to the 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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and uses a semicolon to add the exclusion clause. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition.

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 of the nested params object and rich schema descriptions, the description covers the core purpose and usage boundaries well. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be described. The only minor gap is not mentioning the full set of available filters, but the schema fills that.

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% for the top-level 'params' parameter, so the description must compensate. It names four key criteria (tags, max price, on-sale, platform) and personalization, but omits other params (sort, limit, term, etc.), though those are well-documented inside the nested schema. This partial compensation is adequate but not thorough.

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 uses a specific verb 'Discover' with resource 'games' and enumerates criteria (tags, max price, on-sale, platform). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling steam_recommend by stating this is for filter-based search, not 'games like X'.

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 explicitly says when to use it (filter-based search by criteria) and when not to (not for 'games like X'), naming steam_recommend as the alternative. It also notes optional personalization, giving clear context for user-specific use cases.

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