get_game_prices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it's a read operation ('get') but omits details like rate limits, error handling (e.g., invalid gameId), or response format. This is insufficient for a tool with no structural safety cues.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word is essential; no filler or redundancy. Ideal for quick parsing.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks details on return format, which stores are queried, or what qualifies as a 'deal'. The sibling tools indicate more nuanced options, but for basic price retrieval, it meets minimum needs.

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%, with both parameters described ('gameId' as Steam App ID, 'region' as region code with default). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage but not enhancing understanding.

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 tool retrieves current prices and deals for a specific game across stores. The verb 'Get' and resource 'current prices and deals' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'get_game_bundles' which implies bundle deals, and 'get_historical_low' which focuses on historical data.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, the description lacks when-not-to-use advice or comparisons with sibling tools. However, for a straightforward price lookup, basic usage is implied.

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