Lista de amigos de un usuario

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is established. The description adds no further behavioral context such as response format, rate limits, or error behavior, but it also does not contradict the annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the essential purpose immediately and is highly efficient for its level of detail.

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 read-only tool with two optional parameters, the description is functional but leaves gaps: there is no output schema, so the return shape is undisclosed, and the relationship parameter's distinction between 'all' and 'friend' is not explained. These are minor for this lightweight 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%, with steamid described as optional and defaulting to the caller's ID, and relationship described as a filter with an enum. The description's mention of 'tus amigos' versus 'un ID específico' only restates the steamid property and adds no new semantic information.

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 states a specific verb ('Devuelve' / returns) and a clear resource ('amigos de Steam' / Steam friends), with an optional scope for a specific ID. It is consistent with the title, but it does not explicitly compare itself to any sibling tool, so it lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_friends_current_status or get_friends_recent_activity. The description only says what it returns; it gives no conditions, exclusions, or recommendations for choosing this tool.

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