Skip to main content
Glama

Find co-op games for a group

find_coop_games
Read-onlyIdempotent

Finds PC co-op games on Steam that fit a group of friends and ranks them by how well they fit: group size, budget in US dollars, mood or type tags, typical session length, online or same-screen play, and platform. Each result has the current US Steam price, Steam's user-review label and the Steam store link. Use it when someone asks which co-op game they should play with friends or a group. It searches a curated catalog of co-op games on Steam (PC only, no console or mobile), refreshed daily from Steam's public store and review data; group sizes and tags are curated, session length is an editorial guide from the game type. The catalog includes a game made by Gamevato, the publisher of this tool; it is ranked by the same rules and labeled made_by_publisher when shown.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "find_coop_games"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNoMood or type wanted; a game must match at least one, more matches rank higher. funny (silly, chaotic fun with friends); physics (physics-driven movement and slapstick); climbing (climbing to the top together); driving (driving or vehicles); horror (scary, horror atmosphere); party (party game with short rounds); puzzle (puzzle solving and story campaign); survival (survival and crafting); sandbox (open sandbox to build and explore); shooter (shooting action); cozy (relaxed, cozy farming or building); rage (hard, rage-inducing challenge); competitive (players compete against each other); tethered (players are tied or chained together).
limitNoHow many games to return.
playersNoGroup size including the user. Only games that support at least this many players are returned.
platformNoOperating system every player uses. Omit for any.
max_price_usdNoHighest price per copy in US dollars (US Steam store). 0 = only games with no charge.
session_lengthNoHow long a typical play session should be: short (quick rounds), medium (about an hour), long (multi-hour campaigns or worlds).
local_or_onlineNoonline = everyone on their own PC; local = same screen / couch; either (default).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNo
queryNo
sourceNo
matchesYes
resultsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, and the description adds material context on top: curated catalog provenance, daily refresh from Steam public store/review data, curated group sizes and tags, editorial (not measured) session length, and an explicit conflict-of-interest disclosure with the made_by_publisher label. That last point is unusually frank and directly affects how an agent should present results.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and trigger, then scope/caveats, then the disclosure. Density is high with no filler; the catalog and disclaimer sentences each carry information an agent needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, yet the description still usefully signals what a result contains (price, review label, store link) and the data's freshness and curation limits. For a 7-parameter recommendation tool this is enough for an agent to call it and set expectations correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and enum values are fully documented, so baseline is 3. The description adds synthesis the schema does not: it frames all seven filters collectively as a fit-ranking rather than independent hard filters, which helps an agent decide which parameters actually matter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Finds PC co-op games on Steam') plus the ranking behavior, which is the real differentiator. It doesn't name or contrast with the sibling get_game_details, but the search-then-rank framing makes the boundary reasonably obvious.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit trigger: 'Use it when someone asks which co-op game they should play with friends or a group,' plus hard scope limits (PC only, no console or mobile). No explicit when-not condition or named alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources