player_bansCheck VAC ban, community ban, and economy ban status for one or more comma-separated SteamID64s. Returns CommunityBanned, VACBanned, NumberOfVACBans, DaysSinceLastBan.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| steamids | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| players | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint:false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: it accepts one or more comma-separated SteamID64s and returns specific fields (CommunityBanned, VACBanned, NumberOfVACBans, DaysSinceLastBan). This adds useful context about invocation style and output.
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 two sentences, with the primary action and resource in the first sentence and a concise list of return fields in the second. No filler or repetition. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.
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 tool is simple with a single parameter, and an output schema exists (covering return values). The description fully specifies the input format and the output fields, making it self-sufficient for an agent. Given the low complexity and annotations, no additional context is needed.
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 schema only defines 'steamids' as a string with no description (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explaining the expected format: 'one or more comma-separated SteamID64s'. This is critical for correct invocation, and the schema example reinforces it. The description adds essential meaning beyond the bare 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 identifies the tool's purpose: checking VAC, community, and economy ban status for SteamID64s. It names the specific resource (ban status) and the verb (check), and the output fields are listed. It distinguishes from sibling tools like player_summaries or player_level by focusing specifically on bans.
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 implies the tool should be used when ban information is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or legacy considerations. The clarity of the tool name and description provide some context, but explicit guidance on alternatives is missing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools overlap significantly: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-identical variants, while deep_research, discover_tools, and suggest_questions all serve meta/onboarding purposes. The Steam-specific tools are distinct, but they are drowned out by a large unrelated set (Polymarket, Pipeworx, npm scanning) that makes selection confusing.
Tool names follow no single convention: some are verb_noun (resolve_vanity_url, generate_llms_txt), some are noun-only (app_details, player_stats), and others use domain prefixes inconsistently (polymarket_arbitrage, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research). The mix of descriptive and vague names (process, run, execute) adds to the inconsistency.
At 45 tools, the server is heavily overloaded, especially for a server named 'Steam' where only about a third of the tools actually relate to Steam. The rest belong to Pipeworx, Polymarket, and other unrelated domains, making the scope unclear and the tool count far too large for a focused purpose.
For the Steam domain, the server covers a reasonable range: app details/news, player counts, friends, owned games, achievements, stats, bans, levels, and summaries. However, notable gaps exist such as store search, reviews, wishlist, or any user inventory/trading features. The non-Steam tools add breadth but do not address these missing Steam operations.