Skip to main content
Glama
Sarg338

Steam MCP

by Sarg338
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

steam_get_deck_compatibility

Read-only

Get the Steam Deck compatibility rating for a game using its app ID. Returns Verified, Playable, Unsupported, or Unknown status.

Instructions

Steam Deck rating for a game: Verified, Playable, Unsupported, or Unknown.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv1.18.0
    • removedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / properties / appid / title
      Removed value: -"Appid"
    • removedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / properties / language / title
      Removed value: -"Language"
    • removedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / properties / response_format / $ref
      Removed value: -"#/$defs/ResponseFormat"
    • addedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / properties / response_format / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "markdown",
+  "json"
+]
    • addedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / properties / response_format / type
      Added value: +"string"
    • removedInput schema / $defs / DeckCompatInput / title
      Removed value: -"DeckCompatInput"
    • removedInput schema / $defs / ResponseFormat
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Output format for tool responses.",
-  "enum": [
-    "markdown",
-    "json"
-  ],
-  "title": "ResponseFormat",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"steam_get_deck_compatibilityArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "steam_get_deck_compatibilityOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv1.14.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile, and the description adds the useful behavioral detail that the result is one of Verified, Playable, Unsupported, or Unknown. It does not disclose other behavior such as availability of a full report or handling of invalid appids, which is a minor gap for a simple lookup.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the purpose and the exact output values without wasting words. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only lookup, the description plus schema covers the required input and expected output categories. However, it omits usage context and relies entirely on the schema for parameter meaning, leaving the definition adequate but not complete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With schema description coverage reported at 0%, the description needed to compensate, but it only implies that a game must be identified and never mentions appid, language, or response_format. The input schema itself documents the fields, so the description contributes almost no parameter-level meaning.

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?

The description clearly identifies the resource (Steam Deck rating) and enumerates the four possible values, which distinguishes it from sibling Steam tools at a glance. It lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'return', but the tool name supplies the action.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as steam_get_app_details or steam_analyze_game. The description states only what the rating is, not the conditions that should lead an agent to choose this tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools