steam_plan_coop_night

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., how it aggregates friend libraries, potential rate limits, or that 'owned' mode ranks by ownership count). With annotations present, the baseline is satisfied but not enriched.

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, succinct sentence that gets to the point immediately. No wasted words, and the core action is front-loaded.

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 is complex (multiple modes, several parameters, output schema), but the description only covers the 'owned' aspect and ignores the 'new' mode for suggesting unpurchased games. The rich schema and annotations cannot compensate for the missing high-level context that would help an agent select and invoke the tool correctly in all scenarios.

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 has 1 top-level param ('params') with no description, giving 0% schema coverage. The nested properties do have descriptions, but the tool description itself adds no parameter semantics. It does not compensate for the low coverage, leaving the agent to rely entirely on the schema for 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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('co-op games the host and their friends all own') with a clear purpose ('for game night'). This distinguishes it from siblings like steam_get_owned_games and steam_find_friends_who_own, though it does not mention the 'new' mode, which limits full differentiation.

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 a use case ('for game night') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. Context signals indicate rich parameters like 'mode' and 'friends', but the description gives no hint of when to choose this over simpler library lookups.

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