guildFetch Wynncraft guild details by name or prefix (set by='prefix' to look up by tag); returns member list, level, XP, territories, and seasonal rating.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| by | No | "name" (default) | "prefix" | |
| name_or_prefix | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "name_or_prefix": "Wynncraft"
+ },
+ {
+ "by": "prefix",
+ "name_or_prefix": "WC"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "Guild details from Wynncraft API",
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by listing returned data (member list, level, XP, territories, seasonal rating) without contradicting annotations.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and parameter flexibility. Every part earns its place with no redundancy.
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?
With an output schema present, return values are documented. The description mentions specific return fields for context. Two parameters with one required and examples provided; this is comprehensive for a fetch tool.
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 50% (only 'by' has a description). The description adds that 'by' can be 'name' or 'prefix', but 'name_or_prefix' lacks description in both schema and description. The examples in schema partially compensate.
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 clearly specifies the tool's action ('Fetch') and resource ('Wynncraft guild details'), with methods for lookup by name or prefix. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'guild_list' which lists guilds.
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 provides explicit guidance on using the 'by' parameter with values 'name' or 'prefix' for tag lookup. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the context of siblings like 'guild_list' offers implicit differentiation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.