speedrun_get_game

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('Get details') but does not specify any safety traits (e.g., read-only, non-destructive) or other behaviors like data freshness, error handling, or rate limits. The addition of 'including categories and levels' adds some output context but does not go beyond the obvious.

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 a single sentence of 12 words, immediately stating the purpose and key output components. It is concise and front-loaded with no unnecessary information.

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 (one parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description provides adequate but minimal completeness. It mentions the output includes categories and levels, but 'details' is vague. Without an output schema, more detail on what fields are returned would be helpful for an AI agent to set expectations.

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 the parameter 'game_id' as 'Speedrun.com game ID or abbreviation' (100% coverage). The description does not add significant new semantic meaning beyond implying the parameter identifies the game to fetch. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema is sufficient.

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's purpose: 'Get details of a game on Speedrun.com including categories and levels.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the mention of categories and levels adds specificity. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like speedrun_search_games or speedrun_get_leaderboard, which would require additional context.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where other tools would be more appropriate (e.g., searching for games vs. getting details of known games). The description only states the basic function.

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