Search Steam games

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses prefix matching, typo sensitivity, and language-dependent title behavior. It does not describe output shape, rate limits, or auth, but for a simple search tool the disclosed behaviors are the most decision-relevant.

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?

Three short sentences each add distinct value: purpose, matching rules, and language behavior. The critical 'appid needed by other tools' fact is front-loaded, and there is no redundant filler.

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 there is no output schema, the description communicates the core return purpose (appid) and matching behavior. It does not specify whether multiple results are returned or how limit affects output, but for a straightforward search tool the essential invocation context is present.

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?

Schema description coverage is 67%, covering query and language. The description adds behavioral meaning to query semantics by specifying prefix matching and typo behavior, and enriches language semantics by noting Russian searches return Russian titles. The limit parameter is left to the schema, but the added parameter context is valuable.

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 finds Steam games by name and returns appid, explicitly noting this appid is needed by other tools. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_reviews or search_articles, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 this is the entry-point tool for anything requiring a Steam appid, with concrete matching behavior (prefix, no typos, language-dependent results). It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context and sibling list make the usage clear enough.

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