steam_get_game_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by specifying exactly what the tool returns (achievement and stat definitions) and clarifying that it is not user-specific, which goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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, tight sentence that conveys the tool's purpose and scope without any wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and includes a valuable qualifier about non-user-specificity.

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 is complete for a simple read-only tool with one required parameter and an output schema present. Annotations cover safety, and the description covers purpose and scope. While it does not mention response_format, the schema documents it, so no critical information is missing.

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 schema provides descriptions for both parameters (appid and response_format), including an enum for response_format. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, so with high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The schema adequately covers parameter meaning.

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 achievement and stat definitions for a game, and explicitly notes it is not user-specific. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like steam_get_player_achievements, which focus on user-specific data. The verb 'Get' and resource 'achievement and stat definitions' are specific and unambiguous.

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 when to use the tool by contrasting with user-specific contexts: 'not user-specific' serves as an exclusion, indicating this tool is for game schema definitions rather than player-specific achievements. While it does not explicitly name alternative tools, the exclusion is clear and provides usable context.

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