get_friends_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses return data fields (steamid, friend_since, relationship) and mentions relationship filter behavior. It does not disclose potential rate limits, auth requirements, or side effects, but it's a read-only operation implied by '조회' (retrieve). 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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and includes a useful example. It is structured with a summary, return data explanation, and example. It's slightly verbose due to the example but each part 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, and a usage example. An output schema exists, so return structure details are not necessary. It's complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly, though it could mention edge cases like empty friend lists.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by providing a concrete usage example and explaining the 'relationship' filter values ('all' vs 'friend') in the schema. This goes beyond the schema definitions and helps clarify expected input format.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves a Steam user's friend list (친구 목록을 조회합니다), which matches the tool name. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_user_profile and get_owned_games by specifying the resource (friends) and operation (list). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, so it's not a 5.

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 an example usage with specific parameter values, implying when to use it (to fetch friends with optional relationship filter). But it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the required steam_id.

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