steam_get_app_regional_pricing

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the local-currency behavior but nothing about defaults, rate limits, or output details, so it provides only marginal added value beyond annotations.

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 entire description is one efficient, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the core action and output characteristic, making it appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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?

The description, schema, and annotations together make this minimally viable: a read-only regional-pricing comparison tool with an appid requirement. However, it leaves gaps about default behavior when countries is omitted, the meaning of response_format, and how to distinguish this from sibling price tools.

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 reported as 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter understanding. It does not mention appid, countries, or response_format, nor any constraints or defaults. The schema alone provides some meaning, but the description adds nothing specific to parameters.

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 'compare' with the resource 'a game's price across regions,' and the local-currency detail clearly distinguishes it from siblings like steam_get_app_details or steam_get_market_price. It is a clear, non-tautological purpose statement.

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 implies use for regional price comparison and currency localization, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative Steam pricing/detail tools, nor does it give exclusions. The usage context is clear but not actionable without some inference.

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