Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add Grinv/steam-games-mcp --skill tool-description-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Grinv/steam-games-mcpWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/grinv/steam-games-mcp/tool-description-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/grinv/steam-games-mcp/tool-description-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/grinv/steam-games-mcp/tool-description-check/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/grinv/steam-games-mcp/tool-description-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/grinv/steam-games-mcp/tool-description-check.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00076 | $0.03491 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.01396 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00698 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00349 |
Grade A, and why
tool-description-check scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 243 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tool descriptions: what to check before committing
Published research on this exact failure mode: Glama's TDQS methodology found 97% of 856 tools across 103 real MCP servers have a description defect — 56% don't clearly state what the tool does, 89% don't say when to use it. Separately, "From Docs to Descriptions" measured that strong descriptions get 260% more selection in competitive scenarios and lift task success ~6 points. Bad descriptions aren't a hypothetical risk; they're the median case. This server is scored on the same rubric at glama.ai/mcp/servers/Grinv/steam-games-mcp/score (re-analyzed on Glama's own schedule, not on push — treat this as a manual pre-commit check, not something to verify live after every edit).
| TDQS dimension | Weight | Question |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose Clarity | 25% | Does the description state what the tool does? |
| Usage Guidelines | 20% | Does it say when to use this tool vs. alternatives? |
| Behavioral Transparency | 20% | Does it disclose behavior beyond what annotations already provide? |
| Parameter Semantics | 15% | Does it add meaning beyond what the input schema provides? |
| Conciseness & Structure | 10% | Is it appropriately sized and front-loaded? |
| Contextual Completeness | 10% | Given the tool's complexity, is the description complete enough? |
Usage Guidelines and Behavioral Transparency carry the most weight after Purpose Clarity — double-check those two first on any new or edited tool.
Two rules that override everything below
- No unverified claims. Every behavioral statement in a description —
not just "the schema allows this input," which is self-evidently true,
but "here's what happens when you send it" — must be backed by one of:
- an existing docs/architecture.md "verified live" claim (e.g. its Keyless caveat / API references sections), cited by reference instead of re-asserted from memory;
- a fresh live call against the real Storefront/Web API made during this review, with the actual response observed;
- direct reading of the exact function implementing the behavior, when
it's deterministic code logic rather than an upstream API's quirk (e.g.
format/store.ts'ssummarizeItemsandformat/storefront.ts'ssummarizePricesmarking an unknown appidavailable:falseinstead of erroring — that's this repo's own code, not Valve's).
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago Changed · +10 lines cd2be7a43af8
- 1mo ago First seen · 233 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A e804157769c9
tool-description-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository Grinv/steam-games-mcp (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 3,491 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
liveagent-code-review
Review an open GitHub pull request or the current local branch and working tree with parallel, independent reviewers and evidence-based validation. Use when the user asks for code review, invokes the Code Review action from Git Review, or explicitly mentions this skill.
review
Assess the blast radius of a change and review a diff — what it touches, what could break, which tests to run, and the prior decisions behind it. Use before a refactor, rename, or signature change, and when reviewing a pull request or your own uncommitted diff.
list-lounge-brand-locations
List all Priority Pass, Capital One, Centurion, Chase Sapphire, Plaza Premium, LoungeKey or DragonPass lounges, grouped by country and airport.
lounge-tool-best-practice
Rules that stop the common failures: guessed slugs, missing arguments, repeated searches and rate limits.
check-lounge-access
Work out whether a specific credit card, membership, airline status or day pass gets you into a given lounge.
manage-lounge-history
Review, correct or delete a signed-in user's logged visits and reviews. Requires OAuth with the write scope.