Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

rust.wiki

by wiki.rust
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Rust launch options that work, the myths, and a Steam launch line builder

get_launch_options
Read-onlyIdempotent

Rust launch options that work, the myths, and a Steam launch line builder. The data behind https://rust.wiki/launch-options: groups of options Rust (Facepunch) and Unity 6 actually read, each with its value and what it does, plus myths (popular 'FPS boost' flags nothing shows Rust reads). With line: check.line is the cleaned launch line (known options only, one forced graphics API) and check.options says what each one is (rust, unity, myth, unknown, conflict) with any warning.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_launch_options"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lineNoOptional: options to check and clean up, as you'd paste them into Steam.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish this is a safe, idempotent, read-only, closed-world lookup, so the description needn't cover safety. It does add genuinely non-obvious behavior: the cleaning drops unknown options and leaves exactly one forced graphics API, and each option gets a `rust`/`unity`/`myth`/`unknown`/`conflict` classification with warnings. That is useful, but the shape of `groups` and `myths` in the no-`line` case is left undetailed.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The content is relevant and the mode split is front-loaded, but the first sentence restates the title verbatim and the "data behind https://rust.wiki/launch-options" attribution occupies space without helping an agent decide or invoke. The dense backtick-heavy phrasing packs the payload structure into a single block rather than structuring it.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-optional-parameter retrieval tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description does the necessary work: it names the returned collections and details the check-mode result fields and classifications. Remaining gaps are the exact item shape inside `groups`/`myths`, which is a minor omission at this complexity.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single optional `line` parameter already has a description and example, so the baseline would be 3. The description goes beyond that by explaining the transformation applied to the input (cleaned to known options only, one forced graphics API) and the per-option classification output, which the schema does not convey.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description makes clear this is a reference-data tool: it returns `groups` of launch options that Rust (Facepunch) and Unity 6 actually read, each with its value and effect, plus `myths`. It also states the optional validation mode. The verb is implicit (it's a get-style retrieval), and the opening sentence largely echoes the title, but the resource and payload are unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the phrase "With `line`:" signals that supplying the parameter switches the tool into a check/clean mode, while omitting it returns the reference data. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of what to do with the `myth`, `unknown`, or `conflict` classifications beyond the fact that warnings accompany them.

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

All rust.wiki toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources