rawg_game_screenshots

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic purpose. It omits critical details such as whether the api_key is required for authentication, what happens if the game has no screenshots, rate limits, or the structure of the response.

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 extremely brief (one sentence), but this brevity comes at the cost of missing essential information. It is under-specified rather than concise, as it fails to front-load important details about parameters or behavior.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the parameters, required fields, response format, or how it relates to sibling tools like rawg_get_game. The agent cannot reliably determine when to use this tool or how to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, yet the description adds no information about the parameters. It does not explain that 'id' is the RAWG game ID or that 'api_key' is for authentication, leaving the agent to guess their meanings from context.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves screenshots for a RAWG game, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like rawg_get_game, rawg_search_games, and rawg_upcoming_games, which focus on different aspects.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or direct comparisons to similar tools, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and position among siblings.

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