Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Steam-MCP

Steam-MCP

by sandraschi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_number_of_current_players

Retrieve the current player count for any Steam game using its App ID.

Instructions

Get the current number of players for a Steam game.

No API key required.

Return Format

{"success": bool, "message": str, "data": {"player_count": int}}

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_number_of_current_players"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
app_idYesSteam App ID (e.g. 440).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses the return format fully and notes lack of auth requirements. Without annotations, this is good transparency, though rate limits or error handling are not mentioned.

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?

Highly concise: two sentences plus a structured return format example. Every part earns its place with 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 tool's simplicity (1 param, output schema provided), the description adequately covers purpose, return format, and basic constraint (no API key). Lacks mention of error cases but is otherwise complete.

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 description does not add meaning beyond the input schema's existing app_id description. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3 and no extra value is provided.

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 clearly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('current number of players'), and the scope ('for a Steam game'), with no ambiguity or confusion with sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides explicit guideline that no API key is required, which is helpful context. Does not specify when to use vs. alternatives, but sibling tools are sufficiently distinct.

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