steam_get_player_summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds value by noting that some fields are only returned if the profile is public and that the response can be markdown or JSON. It also mentions error handling with 'Error: ...' strings.

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 a clear purpose sentence followed by a list of returned fields and an Args section. Every sentence adds value, and there is no unnecessary fluff.

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, the annotations, and the presence of an output schema (not shown but noted), the description covers all necessary aspects: what is returned, privacy caveats, parameter details, and error format. It is self-contained and sufficient for correct usage.

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 contains descriptions for both parameters (steam_id and response_format), so the description repeats this information without adding significant new meaning. With high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 profile summary information for a Steam user, listing specific returned fields like display name, profile URL, and online status. This distinguishes it from siblings (owned games, achievements, etc.) by focusing solely on the user's profile summary.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool, such as specifying the required steam_id with a fallback to an environment variable. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but implies usage for profile lookup, which is adequate.

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