steam_frame_dbus_manager

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It only states it does not invoke control methods, but fails to disclose other behavioral traits like permissions, side effects, or what happens on introspection. Minimal value added.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose. Efficient but lacks critical detail on parameters and usage. Not overly verbose, but content is insufficient.

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 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no parameter description, the tool definition is incomplete. The output schema exists but is not described. The agent lacks enough context to use the tool effectively.

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 0%, yet the description provides no meaning for any of the 4 parameters (login, target, http_port, name_type). The description only mentions DBus interfaces/properties generically, leaving the agent to guess parameter purposes.

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 it introspects DBus interfaces/properties without invoking control methods. This distinguishes it from tools that might perform control actions, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like steam_frame_manager_interfaces.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies it's for introspection, but lacks context on when not to use it or which sibling to choose instead.

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