get_player_achievements

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get'), requires authentication (API key), and provides the return format, which helps set expectations. It lacks details on error handling or rate limits, but the core behavior is clear.

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 only two sentences and a return format section. The purpose is front-loaded, and every piece of information is relevant.

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 getter function, the description covers the basics: purpose, authentication, and return format. It lacks error scenarios or edge cases, but the output schema provides further detail, making it mostly complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the two parameters.

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 'Get the achievement list for a player in a specific game,' specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like get_global_achievement_percentages, which targets global percentages.

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 that it requires a STEAM_API_KEY, providing a prerequisite. However, it does not give guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, such as when to use get_player_achievements vs get_global_achievement_percentages.

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