steam_get_wishlist

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds that live prices and sale status can optionally be fetched, which is a behavioral nuance. However, it does not disclose potential costs of enrichment or other side effects beyond what the schema already states.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get a user's Steam wishlist'). Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 concise and, combined with the rich schema and annotations, gives an agent enough to understand the tool's scope. It doesn't cover every edge case, but the schema and output schema fill in the gaps, making the description adequate for this 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 input schema provides rich descriptions for parameters like limit, enrich, and on_sale_only. The description's phrase 'optionally with live prices and sale status' loosely maps to the enrich and on_sale_only fields, but it adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already explains.

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 action (get) and the resource (a user's Steam wishlist), and mentions the optional enrichment with live prices and sale status, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like steam_get_owned_games or steam_get_recently_played_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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It is purely a statement of functionality without contextual usage advice.

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