igdb_search_games

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of the credential requirement, result ordering, or pagination behavior of an external open-world search. With the bar lowered by annotations, this is still an empty contribution.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the core action and data source come first. It is efficient but so terse that efficiency shades into under-specification.

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 tool with no output schema, the description says nothing about what a result contains (id, name, platforms, cover art) or how to follow up with igdb_get_game. The auth parameters are covered by the schema, but the missing return-shape and routing guidance leaves real gaps.

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 all four parameters (query, limit, client_id, client_secret) are already documented, including the limit default and max. The description's 'by name' reinforces the primary parameter but adds no format, matching, or credential-fallback detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search the IGDB games database by name'. An agent can tell it is a name-based search rather than a by-ID lookup. It does not name or differentiate from siblings like igdb_get_game, igdb_list_genres, or igdb_list_platforms, so it stops short of a 5.

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 phrase 'by name' implicitly contrasts with igdb_get_game (detail by ID), but the description never states when to prefer this tool, what happens when multiple games match, or that platform/genre listing tools exist as alternatives. Guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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