games_lookup_v1

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does reveal the HTTP method, authentication requirements, and the absence of required parameters, but it fails to describe the output, side effects, or exact behavior of the lookup, leaving significant ambiguity.

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: two sentences that front-load the HTTP method and endpoint, followed by essential usage constraints and a pointer to full documentation. Every sentence earns its place with no superfluous content.

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 tool's generic schema, lack of output schema, and many sibling lookup tools, the description is incomplete. It does not define the lookup scope, available query/body parameters, return structure, or concrete examples. Reliance on an external guide resource mitigates but does not resolve the gap.

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?

Although the input schema covers all five generic parameters (body, query, headers, oauthToken, pathParams), their descriptions are boilerplate and tool-agnostic. The description only adds 'no additional required parameters,' which is helpful but does not clarify what specific parameters should be passed or how they affect the lookup.

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?

Description states 'Lookup Game' with an explicit GET endpoint (games/lookup/v1), providing a clear verb and resource. However, it is too generic to distinguish from sibling lookup tools such as lookup_gid_title_v1, lookup_shopid_gid_v1, and games_search_v1, and it does not specify what kind of game lookup is performed.

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 mentions that no additional required parameters exist and that an API key (via environment variables) is required. However, it provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling alternatives, and the pointer to the guide resource is more of a reference than actionable usage direction.

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