get_package_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It lists output fields but does not mention safety traits (e.g., read-only, idempotent) or operational details like error handling or rate limits. This is adequate for a simple retrieval tool but lacks explicit behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no extraneous words. Efficient but could include parameter detail without harming conciseness.

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?

The description covers purpose and return fields, which is good given no output schema. However, it lacks parameter format, error behavior, or prerequisites, leaving gaps for a tool with only one parameter and no schema descriptions.

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 description does not explain the package_id parameter beyond its name. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description should provide format or example (e.g., numeric ID). It only adds context that it's for packages/bundles, which is minimal.

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 gets details for a Steam package or bundle, listing specific return fields. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool get_game_details by specifying 'Use for bundles and multi-game packages.'

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 explicitly says 'Use for bundles and multi-game packages,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the implied differentiation from get_game_details.

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