steam_search_apps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns an appid and is not for discovery, but doesn't disclose other behavioral traits like partial-match behavior or multiple results. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is acceptable.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the action and exclusions with zero wasted words.

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 output schema, annotations covering read-only/idempotent safety, and schema-described parameters, the description is largely complete. It covers purpose and exclusions, though it doesn't mention edge cases like partial matching or result limits (though these are in the schema).

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 doesn't elaborate on parameters, but the schema provides descriptions for query, limit, language, and response_format. The description's reference to 'title' aligns with the query parameter, giving minimal added meaning beyond the schema.

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 looks up a game's appid by its title, with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly excludes discovery, recommendations, and buy decisions, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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?

It provides explicit when-to-use context ('when you already know the name and need its ID') and when-not-to-use exclusions ('not for discovery, recommendations, or buy decisions'). It doesn't name specific alternative tools, but the guidance is clear.

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