steam_get_player_bans

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the input format (single or array up to 100), the type of data returned (ban counts, days since last ban, economy ban status), and implicitly that it is a read-only check. It does not mention potential edge cases or rate limits, but the core behavior is well explained.

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, all of which contain substantive information. It front-loads the core purpose, then covers input and output, with no wasted words or redundant 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what the tool does, the accepted input shape, and the nature of the return data. It could provide more detail on the exact response structure or error handling, but it is not necessary for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. It reaffirms the schema's parameter description ('single SteamID64 or an array of up to 100 SteamID64s') without providing additional meaning beyond noting it applies to 'one or more Steam accounts.' This adds little value over the schema itself.

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's function with a specific verb ('Checks') and resource ('VAC, game ban, and community ban status'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings (e.g., steam_get_player_summary, steam_get_friend_list) by focusing specifically on ban-related information.

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 makes it clear this is for retrieving ban statuses for one or more Steam accounts, providing relevant context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of the explicit when/when-not guidance required for a 5.

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