steam_frame_automation_plan

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 states 'return' implying a read operation, but does not mention any side effects, permissions, or constraints. The minimal description does not compensate for the lack of annotations.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is overly brief given the parameter and complexity. It could mention the parameter or the output format without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool has one parameter and an output schema (not shown). The description does not explain the parameter or give any context about the workflow notes. For a tool with moderate complexity, this is incomplete.

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 has one parameter 'scenario' with a default of 'full'. The description offers no explanation of this parameter—its purpose, valid values, or effect. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add meaning 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 returns automation strategy notes for specific workflows (launch, UI, ADB, etc.), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'steam_frame_automation_inventory' which likely lists items rather than providing strategy notes.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its siblings, such as 'steam_frame_automation_inventory' or other steam_frame_* tools. The description lacks context for an AI agent to decide appropriately.

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