Skip to main content
Glama

redm-mcp

by io.github.Cmoen11

Read an exact line range from a raw doc file

read_lines
Read-only

Read an exact line range from a raw doc file by absolute line number — the windowed-read companion to grep_docs. When grep_docs returns a hit at path:line inside a large file, call read_lines({ path, start, end }) to pull the surrounding block. This is the ONLY way to read around a hit in the largest rdr3_discoveries data tables (audio_banks, ingameanims_list, ptfx, soundsets, imaps_with_coords, megadictanims, etc.): their full bodies are NOT in the vector/heading index (only an ~80-line preview is), so semantic_search can't reach them and get_document resolves real section headings only — NOT synthetic lines N-M offsets. start/end are 1-based and inclusive; omit end for a 50-line window; one call returns at most 400 lines (narrow the range for more). For prose .md docs prefer get_document with a heading; to search values use grep_docs; for individual script natives use lookup_native.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoLast line to return (1-based, inclusive). Omit for a 50-line window from `start`. Spans over 400 lines are capped.
pathYesDoc path exactly as returned by `grep_docs` / `browse` / `semantic_search`, e.g. `discoveries/audio/audio_banks/audio_banks.lua`. Do not invent paths.
startYesFirst line to return (1-based, inclusive). Use the line number from a `grep_docs` hit.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses key behavioral traits beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: 1-based inclusive line ranges, optional end with 50-line default, 400-line max, and why full bodies are not accessible via semantic_search or get_document. This provides crucial context for understanding tool limitations and expected behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long but every sentence serves a purpose, covering purpose, alternatives, limitations, and parameter behavior. It is front-loaded with the main action and remains well-structured, though it could benefit from breaking into shorter sentences for readability.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity and the rich schema/annotations, the description is exceptionally complete: it explains when to use it, how it interacts with sibling tools, exact line semantics, caching limitations, and alternative tools. No output schema is needed, and the description fully compensates.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already documents all parameters with full descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by explaining the intended source of each parameter (e.g., path from grep_docs/browse/semantic_search, start from a grep_docs hit) and the inclusive/windowing semantics, which the schema only partially conveys.

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 tool's purpose: 'Read an exact line range from a raw doc file by absolute line number'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by being the 'windowed-read companion to grep_docs' and explaining how it differs from semantic_search and get_document.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit usage guidance: call read_lines after a grep_docs hit, and it is the ONLY way to read around hits in large data tables. It also gives clear alternatives: use get_document for prose .md docs, grep_docs for searching values, and lookup_native for natives.

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

All redm-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct retrieval mode: structured asset lookup, script native resolution, exact token grep, semantic search, doc navigation, raw line access, and contribution. Descriptions explicitly cross-reference 'NOT for' cases, making misselection unlikely even where overlap exists.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names mix verb-object (lookup_native, get_document, read_lines), object-verb (asset_lookup), bare verbs (browse), and descriptive phrases (semantic_search). The verb 'lookup' appears as both suffix and prefix, and 'get'/'read' are used interchangeably for retrieval, though all names are lowercase snake_case and readable.

Tool Count5/5

10 tools is well-scoped for a documentation and reference server. Each tool fills a clear niche with no obvious bloat or redundancy, staying comfortably within the ideal 3-15 range.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle of documentation access: orientation (list_namespaces), discovery (browse), exact and semantic search, native/asset lookup, full-content retrieval (get_document), raw line reading for large tables (read_lines), a calling-convention guide, and community contribution (share_finding). Known limitations in the data layer are addressed with companion tools.

Resources