steam_frame_perfcriteria

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

With no annotations, the description carries full disclosure burden. It only says 'find and parse,' implying read-only data extraction, but does not disclose error behavior, idempotency, or whether it modifies any state. Insufficient for an agent to anticipate side effects.

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 single sentence is extremely short but under-specified; it could be restructured to include key parameter or usage details without adding length.

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 description fails to explain the purpose of all parameters, lacks information about return values despite an output schema existing, and provides no context for how the tool behaves in different scenarios. Inadequate for a tool with 4 parameters and no schema descriptions.

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%, and the tool description provides zero explanation for any of the 4 parameters (login, target, http_port, name_type). The agent has no semantic understanding beyond parameter names and types.

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 finds and parses specific 'perfcriteria.txt' reports, using a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like steam_frame_automation_inventory or steam_frame_cef_pages.

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 alternatives, or any context about prerequisites or limitations. The description is a bare statement of function.

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