get_active_deals

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action and filter but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what fields are returned (e.g., title, store, price), how 'top' is sorted, or any pagination/limitations. The vagueness of 'top' and lack of output schema leave behavior undisclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that captures the core purpose and key filter with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 low-complexity tool with only three parameters and no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of the tool's purpose and primary filter. However, it could be more complete by explaining how results are sorted, what fields are included in the response, or that it is a read-only operation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents limit, country, and minDiscount. The description adds context that minDiscount acts as a filter, but it does not provide substantial new meaning beyond what the schema states, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') with a clear resource ('top active game discounts') and scope ('across digital storefronts'), plus the filtering dimension ('minimum discount percentage'). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_games (search by title) and get_game_prices (prices for a specific game).

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 a use case: browse currently discounted games across multiple storefronts with a discount threshold. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when to use this instead of get_game_prices or search_games, so guidance is only implied rather than direct.

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