steam_get_user_game_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds examples of stats but does not disclose behavior like falling back to the configured STEAM_USER when steamid is omitted; although the schema covers this, the description itself adds limited behavioral context beyond annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to defining the tool's purpose.

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 simple read-only tool, the annotations cover safety, the schema covers parameters, and an output schema exists, the description is mostly complete. Missing explicit guidance about when to prefer this over related stats/achievement tools, but the overall tool definition is still well-rounded.

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 mentions 'kills, wins, distance' but does not explain parameter usage. However, the nested schema contains detailed descriptions for appid, steamid, language, and response_format, so the parameter semantics are largely covered by structured data. The description adds a little semantic flavor but not critical parameter guidance.

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 'Get' and identifies the precise resource: a user's in-game STATS for a specific game, with examples like kills, wins, distance. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like steam_get_player_achievements or steam_get_owned_games.

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 clearly implies it is for retrieving stats about one game, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives such as steam_get_player_achievements. This is clear context without exclusions, so it earns a 4.

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