Fetch one enriched Steam catalog record by appid from the steam-games dataset, returning clean JSON for game lookups.
Get a Steam game from the dataset. Returns one enriched Steam catalog record by appid from dataset id enum value steam-games.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| appid | Yes | Steam app id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0v1.5.0Does 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 that the tool returns one enriched record by appid, which is a clear behavioral trait. However, it does not cover edge cases like missing/invalid appid, potential errors, or what 'enriched' includes.
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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no fluff. Every word 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 (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), and the description is adequate for a single-record lookup. It covers the core behavior but could be more complete by describing the return structure or error handling, though the low complexity lessens the gap.
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%, and the schema already states that appid is the Steam app id. The description merely repeats 'by appid' without adding new details like format, constraints, or examples, so it stays at the baseline.
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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Steam game'), and clearly states it returns one record by appid. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like datasets_steam_games_search by specifying the lookup key and dataset id enum value.
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 usage when you have an appid ('by appid'), providing clear context but no explicit alternatives or when-not guidance. It does not mention that search tools should be used when the appid is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.