get_steam_recent_activity

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 steamid is optional and defaults to the user's own ID, which is useful. However, it does not mention what 'recent activity' includes (e.g., playtime, achievements, game launches), whether it requires authentication, or what the response shape is. For a read tool with no annotations, this is a moderate gap.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Args section is a bit redundant with the schema but adds the default behavior. No wasted words, though the formatting could be tighter.

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 has an output schema, so return values are covered elsewhere. The description covers the main input and default behavior. However, given the large sibling set and no annotations, it would benefit from clarifying what counts as 'recent activity' and how it differs from my_steam_recent_activity. It is adequate but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the one parameter (steamid) and its optionality/default behavior, which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type/default. However, it doesn't specify the expected format of the Steam ID (e.g., 64-bit ID string) or any constraints, so the compensation is partial.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get user's recent Steam gaming activity.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_steam_library or get_player_summary, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative. The optional steamid parameter is also mentioned, adding specificity.

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: call it to retrieve recent Steam activity, optionally for a specific user via steamid. It does not explicitly state when to use this over siblings like my_steam_recent_activity or get_player_summary, nor does it provide exclusions or alternatives. The context is clear but not explicit.

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