compare_games_with_friend

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the purpose and parameter, with no mention of read-only nature, authentication requirements, or side effects. The agent must infer behavior from the tool name and description.

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 extremely concise, with a clear one-sentence purpose and an Args block that documents the parameter. 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 single-parameter comparison tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential information needed to invoke it correctly. However, it omits any prerequisites or edge cases (e.g., friend must be in the user's friend list), and it does not clarify how it differs from siblings, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 schema provides only the parameter name and type (string), with 0% description coverage. The description's Args section adds meaning by explaining that 'friend_steamid' is the Steam ID of the friend to compare with, compensating for the schema gap.

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 verb 'Compare' and the resources ('your game library' and 'friend's library') with a specific outcome ('find common games'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_steam_library or get_friends_current_games, which only fetch one side.

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 usage by stating the action, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or point to other tools for related tasks, leaving the selection to inference.

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