steamdt_search_item_by_name

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the caching requirement and that the tool returns marketHashName and specialStyle values. However, it does not mention error handling, rate limits, or what happens if the cache is missing.

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 three sentences, front-loading the core purpose and then adding key details about prerequisites and special style recognition. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description clearly states what is returned (marketHashName and specialStyle). It covers the prerequisite and parameter behavior. With two parameters well-described and sibling context, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description covers the query and limit parameters adequately. The description adds value by explaining that the query is processed for automatic style keyword recognition and returns specialStyle, which goes beyond the schema's documentation.

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 that the tool performs a fuzzy search by Chinese or English name for items, returning matching marketHashName and recognizing special style keywords. It is distinct from sibling tools which are primarily data retrieval or inspection functions.

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 mentions a prerequisite: calling steamdt_get_base_info first to establish a cache. It also notes automatic recognition of special style keywords, guiding when to use this tool for style filtering. However, it does not specify when not to use it or provide alternatives.

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