lookup_game

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action ('Lookup') and what is returned (metadata and UUID), but does not disclose additional traits such as return format, error handling, or behavior when both parameters are provided. This is adequate but not rich.

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, focused sentence that states purpose and key inputs with no redundancy. Every word earns its place.

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 simple lookup tool with two self-descriptive parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it does and how to invoke it. It lacks only explicit disambiguation from search_games, which would elevate it to fully 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?

The schema already documents both parameters fully, including an example for steamAppId. The description adds the crucial semantic that the two parameters are alternative lookup keys ('using a Steam AppID or game title'), which is not explicit in the schema.

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 the specific verb 'Lookup' and clearly identifies the resource ('ITAD game metadata and internal ITAD UUID') and the lookup keys ('Steam AppID or game title'). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like search_games, which implies searching rather than direct lookup.

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 provides clear context: use this tool when you have a Steam AppID or game title to retrieve metadata/UUID. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is unambiguous for a direct-lookup tool.

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