There are a few short games on steam that I wouldn't add on my library even if they were free, their value is worse than the annoyance of seeing their names on my library and I would return them for free to steam even if I got nothing with it, I would pay for someone to erase my memory of them. I don't think it is a question of size and more of design, there are a few short games that are really lacking in content and there are longer games that would be better shorter, I think you should have a design goal and plan your content to realize that design goal, anything more than that and less than that is a waste.
Take the Elder Scrolls games, they are often criticized for how shallow they are as games, they are "long" games but they are terribly lacking in content, in this case deeper systems and better content, Bethesda instead of adding meaninful content on their games, they fill their crap with shit busywork so you experience a huge world where you only do busywork everywhere and it gets even worse, at least on Morrowind when still someone competent worked at Bethesda, they tried adding some context to the busywork, nowdays, even that is asking too much.Technically they have alot of content but of terribly low quality.
They took a design goal, "make a huge open world", they didn't have the content to realize that vision then they half-assed a shiton of busywork pretending otherwise, so, no wonder why only psychopaths manage to finish modern Bethesda games. So, a good tip, if the game has an "open world" tag on steam, run from it.