steam_resolve_vanity_url

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds details on return value format (success: SteamID64 + name; failure: error string; no match: message), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 short paragraphs, front-loads the main purpose, and uses clear structure with Args and Returns sections. No unnecessary words.

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 description fully covers purpose, usage, parameter, and return value. Annotations and output schema handle the rest.

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?

Despite the context claiming 0% schema description coverage, the actual schema includes a description for the parameter. The tool description further explains the parameter's meaning and gives an example, adding value beyond the schema.

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 it resolves a vanity URL to a SteamID64, using specific verb 'Resolve' and resource 'vanity profile URL name'. It differentiates from sibling tools by noting that other tools need numeric ID, so this tool is the prerequisite.

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 to use this tool first when only having a custom URL name, implying alternatives are the sibling tools that require numeric ID. It also specifies what input is valid (only the name, not full URL).

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