Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP SteamOS Devkit

MCP SteamOS Devkit

by elliotttate
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

steam_frame_tracking_datasets

List SteamVR tracking datasets recorded from Steam Frame Developer settings for analysis or diagnostics.

Instructions

List SteamVR tracking datasets recorded from Steam Frame Developer settings.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "steam_frame_tracking_datasets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
loginNo
targetYes
http_portNo
name_typeNoguess

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations present, so description must bear full burden. Only states 'List', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits like required permissions, side effects, or rate limits. Minimal disclosure.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single, very short sentence. While concise, it sacrifices essential detail. It is front-loaded but insufficient for a tool with 5 undocumented parameters.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no annotations and 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain parameters, return values (though output schema exists, it is not described), or usage context. The tool's complexity demands more information.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no information about the 5 parameters (target, limit, login, http_port, name_type). The agent cannot infer their meanings or usage from the description alone, making the tool unusable without external knowledge.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'SteamVR tracking datasets' from a specific source. It distinguishes from siblings like 'sync_tracking_dataset' (sync) and 'tracking_dataset_analyze' (analyze). However, it lacks detail on what kind of listing or any filtering, leaving some ambiguity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'sync_tracking_dataset' or 'tracking_dataset_analyze'). No mention of prerequisites or context. The agent gets no direction on appropriate scenarios.

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