steam_get_dlc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the optional live prices/sale status behavior, which is useful. However, it does not disclose performance trade-offs (e.g., one store lookup per DLC when enriching) or output format flexibility, so transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 verb and object. It is concise, with no wasted words or repetition of the title.

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 has six parameters and an output schema, and the description is minimal but not misleading. The schema and annotations cover safety and parameter details, so the description is sufficient for basic selection. However, it does not mention when to set enrich=false to avoid performance costs or how to choose response_format, which would be helpful for a complex 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?

The context signal reports schema description coverage of 0%, so the description must compensate. The phrase 'optionally with live prices and sale status' hints at enrich and on_sale_only, but it does not explain limit, country_code, response_format, or the appid requirement. Despite the schema actually containing descriptions, the provided signal indicates the description carried the burden and fails to do so.

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 lists a game's DLC (add-ons), using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('a game's DLC'). It also distinguishes itself by mentioning optional live prices and sale status, which sets it apart from sibling tools like steam_get_app_details or steam_get_app_tags.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to list DLC for a game. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly among siblings.

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