igdb_get_game

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world, non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only 'full details,' and notably omits any mention of the client_id/client_secret parameters or whether auth is required, leaving a gap the description should fill.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the key information (resource, source, lookup key) front-loaded. No waste, though it could do more without bloat.

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 read-only lookup with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the basics are covered. However, the undocumented auth parameters and vague 'full details' leave an agent without guidance on credentials or return shape.

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 only 33%: game_id is documented but client_id and client_secret are undocumented in both schema and description. The description restates the game_id semantics but adds nothing about the two undocumented parameters, failing to compensate.

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?

Names a specific verb (get), resource (game), source (IGDB), and lookup key (game ID), which implicitly separates it from igdb_search_games. It is clear but doesn't explicitly state what extra scope it covers versus the search sibling.

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?

'by game ID' implies you should use this when you already have an ID, but the description never says when to prefer igdb_search_games or what to do if you lack an ID. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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