steam_get_recently_played_games

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the time window and hours detail, which is useful context, but does not mention the optional steamid behavior or response formats. Given the annotations and output schema, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 of 12 words, front-loaded with the action verb and immediately stating the resource and output. Every word is essential and there is no filler.

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 an output schema, annotations cover its safety and idempotency, and the schema documents all parameters. The description succinctly states the core function, leaving no critical gaps for this simple read-only 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 schema provides detailed descriptions for both parameters: steamid (SteamID64, vanity name, or URL, with fallback to configured user) and response_format (markdown/json). The description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema covers it thoroughly, warranting the baseline 3.

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 ('List') with a clear resource ('games a user has played in the last two weeks') and specifies the output ('with hours'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like steam_get_owned_games, which lists all owned games rather than recently played ones.

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 implicitly communicates when to use the tool (whenever recently played games and playtime are needed), and its scope ('last two weeks') distinguishes it from related queries. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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