steam_library_searchSearch Steam library games by name using fuzzy, punctuation-insensitive matching. Use it to resolve a game name to an appid before performing other operations.
Find games by name. Fuzzy and punctuation-insensitive, ranked best-first. Use this to turn a game name into an appid before calling any tool that takes appids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| include_hidden | No | ||
| installed_only | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal core search behavior—fuzzy matching, punctuation-insensitivity, and best-first ranking. It does not discuss empty results, read-only guarantees, or output shape, but these are less critical for a lookup-style tool.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the use case is stated in the final sentence. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
The description covers purpose, matching behavior, and the appid use case, which is enough for a bare query call. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves the non-query parameters and the exact return format underspecified, so agents using filters or expecting a structured response are not fully equipped.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only clarifies the query concept. The limit, include_hidden, and installed_only parameters are not explained at all beyond their names and defaults, leaving agents without meaningful guidance for filtering or pagination.
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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Find games by name.' It then adds differentiating behavior—'Fuzzy and punctuation-insensitive, ranked best-first'—and connects the tool to its role in appid lookup, setting it apart from library list/detail siblings.
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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to turn a game name into an appid before calling any tool that takes appids.' It gives clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, so it stops just short of full routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.