Fetch detailed Steam game metadata by App ID, including description, categories, genres, player support, release date, and price. Get all essential game details in one request.
Get detailed information about a Steam game by its App ID. Returns comprehensive metadata including description, categories, genres, supported players, release date, price, and more.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| appid | Yes | The Steam App ID of the game |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' clearly implies a read-only operation and the description lists what is returned. However, it does not disclose potential errors, rate limits, authentication needs, or behavior for invalid App IDs, though these gaps are less critical for a simple getter.
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?
One single, front-loaded sentence states the action, the input key, and the output scope. There is no redundant phrasing or filler, and the list of metadata fields earns its place by clarifying what 'details' means.
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?
For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential call context: what to provide and what to expect back. It does not describe the response structure, but the enumerated return fields give sufficient guidance for an agent to decide if this tool fits.
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 input schema already describes appid as 'The Steam App ID of the game' with 100% coverage. The description adds no further semantic detail about appid format, provenance, or constraints, so it provides no value beyond the schema 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a Steam game by its App ID', and enumerates the metadata returned. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like steam_get_dlc_list or game_get_full_profile, but the scope is specific enough to infer the difference.
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 an App ID is known and comprehensive game metadata is needed. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it, nor does it mention alternatives such as steam_search_game for finding an App ID first.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.