get_game_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the return content (display names, descriptions, hidden status, stat definitions) and implicitly indicates it is a read operation. However, it does not discuss potential errors, rate limits, or permissions, limiting full transparency.

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 concise, with two short paragraphs that front-load the primary action and then elaborate on return values. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 simple input schema (one required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and return information. It could be improved by mentioning the parameter, but it remains sufficient for an agent to use 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?

There is only one required parameter (app_id) but the description does not explain its meaning (Steam App ID), format, or constraints. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but fails to add value beyond the schema itself.

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 achievement and stat definitions for a Steam game. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_achievements' (which likely returns user-specific progress) and 'get_player_stats' (current stats), by emphasizing 'definitions' (schema/metadata).

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 notes it is 'useful for understanding what stats and achievements a game tracks,' which implies a use case of exploring game metadata. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, leaving room for ambiguity.

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