rust.wiki

Every weapon's damage, DPS, fire rate, magazine, reload and range

get_weapon_stats

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every weapon's damage, DPS, fire rate, magazine, reload and range. The data behind https://rust.wiki/weapons: every gun, bow, launcher and main melee weapon with damage per bullet/pellet (standard ammo), pellets (shotguns), hit (damage x pellets), raw dps (hit x rpm / 60 - ignores reloads, recoil, armour and falloff), magazine, reload_s, range_m (damage falloff start-end) / range_end, ammo, workbench (level to craft; null = loot only, 0 = no bench) and notes. Checked against Facepunch's wiki and patch notes (sources, verified); Facepunch rebalances weapons often.

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_weapon_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No	Sort key: highest first, except `name` and `reload_s` (lowest first).	dps
`search`	No	Case-insensitive match on the weapon name.
`category`	No	Restrict to one weapon type.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: provenance (rust.wiki, Facepunch wiki and patch notes), a `verified`/`sources` audit trail, an explicit caveat that `dps` ignores reloads, recoil, armour and falloff, and a warning that weapons are rebalanced often. That data-quality framing is exactly what annotations cannot convey.

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 first sentence front-loads the scope as a clean summary, then the remainder unpacks the response fields. It is dense and backtick-heavy, but with no output schema that field catalogue is doing necessary work rather than padding. No sentence is filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly compensates by defining every returned field, including the derived-metric formulas and null/zero semantics for `workbench`. The one real omission is any sense of result size or truncation behaviour for a tool that returns the whole weapon catalogue with no pagination parameter, and there is no instruction on how to combine filters.

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 description coverage is 100% and two of the three parameters are enums with inline sort-direction and matching semantics, so the schema already carries the parameter burden. The description adds nothing about `sort`, `search` or `category`; its detail is spent entirely on returned fields, which is a different concern. Baseline 3 applies.

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 opening sentence names a concrete resource (every weapon) and its measurable attributes (damage, DPS, fire rate, magazine, reload, range), so an agent immediately knows this is a weapons statistics table rather than an item lookup. It never contrasts itself with nearby siblings such as get_item or search_items, leaving the boundary to be inferred, but the scope is unmistakable.

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?

The phrase 'every weapon' implies a bulk, sortable dataset, so an agent can infer this is the tool for cross-weapon comparison rather than single-item inspection. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the sort/search/category filters in prose, and no named alternative for a single-weapon lookup, so guidance stays implicit.

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

All rust.wiki tools Inspect

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

Need Help?