Guild List
guild_listList all guilds.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
guild_listList all guilds.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {}
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "List of all guilds from Wynncraft API",
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide comprehensive behavioral hints (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond restating the basic operation. No contradictions.
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?
Extremely concise: two words. No wasted sentences. Front-loaded with the core action and resource.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects, output schema present), the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks usage context like when to prefer this over sibling tools.
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?
Input schema has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage. Baseline for zero parameters is 4; description does not need to add parameter information.
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 'List all guilds' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing from the sibling tool 'guild' which likely targets a single guild.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'guild' for a specific guild. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.
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.