steam_get_app_regional_pricing

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds one behavioral detail beyond annotations: prices come back in each region's own local currency. It does not disclose behavior for unsupported/unknown country codes, rate limits, or output structure, but for a simple read-only lookup the annotation lowers the burden.

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?

A single 12-word sentence front-loaded with the verb 'Compare'. Zero filler or redundancy; the parenthetical about local currency earns its place because it clarifies the return behavior.

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 tool is simple: one required param (appid), two optional params fully documented in the schema including the output format enum, and readOnlyHint covering safety. The description supplies the core scenario. The only real gap is the absence of an output schema, leaving the exact return shape unspecified, but that is minor for a straightforward price comparison tool.

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?

Despite the 0% coverage signal, the visible input schema actually documents all three parameters well: appid as the Steam ID, countries with max 20 and local-currency behavior, and response_format as a markdown/json enum with a default. The description adds little beyond restating the local-currency note already present in the schema's countries description, so the schema carries the weight and the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Compare'), resource ('a game's price'), and scope ('across regions, each in its own local currency'). Among 40+ siblings, none offer regional price comparison, so an agent can immediately tell this apart from steam_get_market_price (community market) and steam_get_app_details (general app data).

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 is purely a purpose statement and offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It never mentions alternatives such as steam_get_market_price or steam_get_app_details, nor states conditions (e.g., 'when you need to compare store prices across countries'). Usage must be entirely inferred from the name and one-line purpose.

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