get_game_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the return data (achievements, availableGameStats, gameStats), which is helpful. However, it doesn't mention whether the operation is read-only, any permissions needed, or error conditions. The read-only nature is implied by '조회' but not explicitly stated.

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 compact: a one-sentence purpose, a list of return data, and a usage example. It is well-structured and wastes no words. However, there is a minor corrupted character in the text ('�적들'), slightly detracting from polish.

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, an output schema, and full parameter coverage, the description is quite complete. It states the purpose and return contents. It lacks guidance on when to use versus alternatives, but that's covered under usage guidelines. The availability of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values in detail.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (app_id and language) with 100% coverage. The description adds a concrete usage example, but no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 explicitly states the tool retrieves the game's achievement and stats schema, using a specific verb ('조회합니다') and resource ('업적과 통계 스키마'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_player_achievements (player-specific) and get_game_details (general info).

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 a clear usage example (app_id=730, language='english'), implying this tool is for retrieving schema data. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.

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