steam_get_owned_games

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (table of game names, AppIDs, playtime), the private-library error, and supports filtering/sorting/limiting. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but the safety profile is clear: this is a read-only operation.

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 concise sentences that front-load the main purpose, then summarize options and behavior. Every sentence adds value and there is no verbosity.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately explains the return values (game names, AppIDs, playtime) and the error condition for private libraries. It doesn't detail pagination or rate limits, but for a fairly simple read tool with a 5-param schema, this is reasonably complete.

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 already describes all five parameters with 100% coverage. The description largely restates the schema (e.g., default 50, max 500, sorting keys, SteamID format). It adds no new meaning beyond the structured input definitions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the game library of a Steam player, using the specific verb 'Returns' and identifying the resource (owned games). It differentiates from siblings by focusing on the full library with filtering/sorting options, which is distinct from recently played, friends, or achievements.

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 provides clear context on input types (SteamID64 or vanity URL) and options, but does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of alternatives like steam_get_recently_played. It gives a strong sense of purpose without explicit exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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