steamdt_get_wear_by_inspect_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool is read-only (query), supports async mode, and has a rate limit. It does not detail error handling or authentication needs, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 extremely concise: two sentences deliver the core purpose, async support, and rate limit. Every sentence contributes meaningfully, and the most critical information (purpose) is first. No redundant or irrelevant text.

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 the main functionality and sync/async modes, but lacks details on the exact output structure (no output schema) and error handling. For a simple query tool, it is adequate but leaves gaps for an agent to interpret the return format and failure scenarios.

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%, with both parameters having clear descriptions. The tool description supplements the schema by explaining the sync/async flow ('不填则等待同步返回') and linking the inspect URL parameter to the tool's purpose. This adds value beyond the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states the tool queries item wear and related data (stickers, charms, float values) via a CS2 inspect URL. The verb '查询' and resource '饰品磨损度及相关数据' are specific. The sibling 'steamdt_get_wear_by_asmd' is implicitly distinguished by the method (inspect URL vs ASMD), making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Description mentions support for synchronous and asynchronous callbacks and a rate limit of 36000/hour, providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'steamdt_get_wear_by_asmd' or 'steamdt_get_inspect_by_url', leaving selection guidance implicit.

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