steam_get_app_reviews

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. The description adds the useful lifetime/recent distinction but doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like pagination or response details. With annotations, this is adequate.

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, clear sentence with no filler, perfectly sized for the purpose. It front-loads the core function and includes a useful parenthetical scope.

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 (8 parameters) and presence of an output schema, the description is concise but sufficient. It explains the tool's primary purpose and the lifetime/recent distinction, while the schema covers parameter details. It could be more complete with usage examples or alternative guidance, but it's above average.

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?

The description does not mention any parameters directly, but the input schema provides detailed descriptions for most parameters (appid, limit, language, day_range, review_type, review_filter, response_format), covering their semantics. The description's mention of 'lifetime and/or recent' aligns with review_filter but adds no unique parameter information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool retrieves review score and sample reviews for a game, with an explicit scope of 'lifetime and/or recent'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like steam_get_app_details or steam_get_app_tags, which serve different purposes.

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 usage when review data is needed, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternative tools. It's sufficient but not explicit.

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