steam_logs_manifest

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list recent files', which implies a read-only operation but omits details like sorting, filtering, pagination, or the meaning of 'recent'. No side effects are noted.

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 of 13 words, which is concise. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points, examples) and could benefit from organized parameter details.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is insufficient for a tool with 7 parameters. It fails to explain parameter semantics, default values, or typical usage patterns, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 explanation of the 7 parameters (limit, login, target, pattern, http_port, name_type, include_tmp). The agent cannot infer how to use these parameters from the description alone.

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 it lists recent Steam, SteamVR, OpenXR, Lepton, trace, and dump files. It is clear about the resource and action, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like lepton_artifacts_manifest or sync_logs, which also deal with file listings.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., adb_logcat for live logs, sync_logs for transferring logs). There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

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