steam_get_player_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals that private profiles return limited data, which is a key behavioral caveat. It also lists all returned fields, setting expectations for output. It does not discuss errors or authentication, but for a simple fetch tool, this is sufficient.

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: purpose, input syntax, and output/limitation. It is front-loaded with the main action and uses a compact list for return fields. No wasted words, though the field enumeration makes it slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is quite complete: it covers input types, return fields, and privacy behavior. It does not mention error cases or rate limits, but those are minor gaps given the simplicity of the operation.

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 schema fully documents the 'steamid' parameter. The description repeats the same information (SteamID64 or vanity URL) with examples, adding no new semantic content beyond the schema. 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetches') and resource ('public profile of a Steam player'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like friend lists, bans, and owned games. It also enumerates the exact data returned, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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 clearly indicates the tool is for fetching profile information and explains accepted input formats (SteamID64 or vanity URL), giving practical guidance. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the purpose is so distinct that usage context is clear.

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