Skip to main content
Glama

Wavedash

by io.github.wvdsh

Plan Wavedash Implementation

wavedash_implementation_planner
Read-only

Plan a Wavedash game implementation from the user's goal, engine, and requested features. Use this before making architecture claims, selecting SDK features, or writing Wavedash integration code. Read-only and unauthenticated.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalYesWhat the user wants to build or integrate, including the game type and Wavedash-related outcome.
engineNoOptional engine/framework, for example phaser, unity, godot, three.js, react, rust, or custom.
featuresNoOptional requested Wavedash features, for example multiplayer, achievements, leaderboards, cloud-saves, ugc, players, paid-content, upload, or publishing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesHuman-readable tool result text.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and description adds 'Read-only and unauthenticated', confirming safe behavior. Additional context about planning nature beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, no wasted words. Purpose and usage are front-loaded.

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?

With output schema present, description need not explain returns. It covers why and when to use, and is complete for planning before integration.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description lists parameter names but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states the tool plans a Wavedash game implementation, specifying verb 'Plan' and resource 'Wavedash game implementation'. It distinguishes from siblings by indicating it should be used before architecture claims or SDK selection.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use: 'Use this before making architecture claims, selecting SDK features, or writing Wavedash integration code'. While it doesn't state when not to use, the guidance is clear and actionable.

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

All Wavedash 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: workflow, documentation retrieval, checklists, quickstart, SDK reference, planning, search, and config validation. No overlap.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix, but 'implementation_planner' deviates as a noun phrase, slightly reducing consistency.

Tool Count5/5

8 tools is well-scoped for a documentation and planning assistant—not too few to cover needs, not too many to overwhelm.

Completeness5/5

The tool set comprehensively covers the stated domain: fetching docs, planning implementations, searching, and validating config. No obvious gaps for its read-only purpose.

Resources