Juegos jugados recientemente

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a read-only operation, and the description adds the 2-week scope and the default-ID behavior. These are useful, but richer behavioral context such as authentication assumptions, response format, or pagination is missing.

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 only two short sentences, front-loading the action and scope before the default behavior. There is no redundant or filler content.

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, low-complexity read-only tool with no required parameters and full schema coverage, the description is largely complete: it gives the time window and the default ID behavior. It does not describe the return payload, but no output schema exists and the tool's purpose makes the return shape reasonably inferable.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds extra meaning by stating that steamid defaults to the caller's own ID, which clarifies the optionality beyond the schema. This pushes it above the baseline.

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 ('Lista') and states the exact resource ('juegos jugados en las últimas 2 semanas'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. The 2-week window also distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_owned_games or get_family_owned_games.

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 useful context by specifying the time window and the default behavior of using the caller's ID. However, it does not explicitly mention any sibling alternative or state when not to use this tool, so the agent must infer selection among the many game-related sibling tools.

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