get_player_bans

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 the return fields and includes a usage example, but doesn't mention rate limits, error behavior, or confirm this is a read-only operation. The return data description is helpful but not exhaustive.

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 the purpose, lists return fields efficiently, and includes a short example. No wasted words.

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 single parameter with 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context for an agent. It explains returns even though output schema exists, which is a bonus. It lacks details on error handling but that's not critical for this simple tool.

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 the parameter is well documented. The description adds a usage example but does not significantly expand on the parameter semantics beyond 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 clearly states the tool retrieves VAC and game ban status for players, specifying the resource (player bans) and the action (retrieve). It lists the returned fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_user_profile or get_owned_games.

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 usage example with steam_ids and implies use for ban queries. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or any exclusions, but the context with sibling tool names makes it clear.

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