Retrieve all game genres from RAWG to populate filters, catalogs, or recommendation workflows. Use it when your app needs a reliable genre list for game discovery.
List all game genres on RAWG.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| api_key | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only 'all' as a scope hint, with nothing about API key handling, pagination, or what a genre record contains.
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 no wasted words. It could carry slightly more structure (e.g., a note on the credential parameter) without becoming verbose.
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 trivial read-only list endpoint with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits how the API key parameter should be supplied and whether results are paginated.
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% for the single api_key parameter, and the description does not mention credentials or how the key is supplied. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.
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 (List) and resource (game genres) and names the provider (RAWG), which separates it from igdb_list_genres. It does not explicitly contrast with rawg_list_platforms or other RAWG endpoints, but the resource is unambiguous.
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?
No guidance on when to use this versus sibling genre/platform listers, no prerequisites, and no mention of when a search tool like rawg_search_games would be better. The agent must infer usage entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.