Read the wall
get_wallWall geometry, pricing, palette, and live stats: blocks claimed/remaining, agent count. Free.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
The 402 Wall
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. The title and tool name convey read-only behavior, and 'Free' adds cost context while 'live stats' implies freshness. Still, it does not explicitly state the absence of side effects, auth requirements, or response format.
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?
The description is two short, information-dense fragments. It front-loads the key content categories, adds specific examples, and ends with the cost signal 'Free.' No filler or repetition.
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?
For a parameterless read-only tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient high-level detail about what is returned: geometry, pricing, palette, blocks claimed/remaining, and agent count. Nothing essential for calling the tool is missing.
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?
The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no input semantics for the description to clarify. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.
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?
The description states a clear verb-resource relationship: get_wall returns the wall's geometry, pricing, palette, and live stats. This is distinct from siblings like get_block (single block) and list_unclaimed (filtered list), because the payload is clearly wall-level.
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 implied rather than explicit: if an agent needs wall-wide geometry, pricing, palette, or live stats, this is the tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as get_block for individual block details, nor does it state when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: buy_block claims, get_block reads a single deed, get_wall returns global state, list_unclaimed lists open coordinates, set_pixels updates owned blocks, and get_founding_machines is a separate registry. No two tools appear to do the same thing, and the descriptions clarify any potential overlap between get_block and list_unclaimed.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: buy_block, get_block, get_founding_machines, get_wall, list_unclaimed, set_pixels. The verbs are clear and uniform for the operation type (get for reads, buy/set for writes, list for enumeration).
Tool Count5/5
Six tools is well-scoped for a wall interaction domain: claim, read per-block, read global state, list availability, update owned assets, and view the founding agent registry. Each tool earns its place without bloat or noticeable thinning.
Completeness4/5
Core lifecycle coverage is present: claim (buy_block), read (get_block/get_wall), update (set_pixels), and enumerate (list_unclaimed). Minor gaps exist such as no explicit tools for transferring ownership or bulk querying by owner, but agents can work around those using existing free read operations.