steam_getNewsForApp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that no API key is required, which is helpful. However, it does not mention rate limits, caching, idempotency, or whether the data is live or cached. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences long and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

For a simple read tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: returns, key fields, and authentication requirement. It lacks mention of optional parameter defaults but those are in the schema. Overall, it is nearly complete.

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 already describes all three parameters (appid, count, maxlength) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation for a tool with high schema coverage.

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 retrieves recent news articles for a Steam app, listing the returned fields (titles, URLs, contents, dates, authors). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like steam_getAppDetails or steam_getReviews, which serve different purposes.

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 suggests using this tool when news articles are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., steam_getAppDetails for app details) or provide when-not-to-use guidance. No alternative tools are mentioned.

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