Steam-MCP

get_game_leaderboards

Fetches all leaderboards for a Steam game by providing its App ID. Use this to view competitive rankings and player scores.

Instructions

Get the list of leaderboards for a Steam game.

Requires STEAM_API_KEY.

Return Format

{"success": bool, "message": str, "data": {"leaderboards": [...]}}

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": {
      "app_id": "<app_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_game_leaderboards"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`app_id`	Yes	Steam App ID.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses the need for an API key and outlines the return format. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only or describe any side effects, which would enhance transparency.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences and a return format. Every sentence is necessary, and the purpose is front-loaded. No redundant information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the simple tool (one parameter, output schema provided in description), it is almost complete. It includes purpose, auth requirement, and return structure. Minor gaps: no mention of potential errors or clarification of leaderboard scope, but sufficient for basic use.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema already provides a description for app_id ('Steam App ID.') with 100% coverage. The description adds no further semantic detail, meeting the baseline for completely documented parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states 'Get the list of leaderboards for a Steam game,' providing a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_app_details or get_player_achievements, which focus on other aspects.

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. It mentions the requirement for STEAM_API_KEY but does not explain scenarios or exclusions. Sibling tools are available for different data, but no comparative advice is given.

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

Deploy Server