steam_get_friend_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the 50-friend limit, the extra API calls when resolve_names is true, and the error message for private profiles. This is thorough and sets accurate expectations for the agent.

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 three sentences with the primary action first, followed by input details, then options and error handling. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers inputs, outputs, constraints, and error conditions. It explains return values (friend names and dates) and the optional raw SteamID format, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter meaning (e.g., 'Set resolve_names=false to skip name resolution') but does not add information beyond what the schema already provides for both steamid and resolve_names.

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 'Returns the friend list of a Steam player' and provides specific details about the input (SteamID64 or vanity URL) and output (up to 50 friends with names and friend-since dates). This makes the tool's distinct purpose obvious compared to sibling tools like steam_get_player_summary or steam_get_player_bans.

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 gives clear context on how to use the tool, including accepted input types and the optional resolve_names flag. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the tool's specialized behavior and the note about private profiles provide enough guidance for most cases.

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