Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cp77wb-mcp

cp77wb-mcp

by 0xra0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wb_native_verify

Checks that converted sector, block, and device files exist and contain valid CR2W magic, helping catch missing or corrupted outputs before build.

Instructions

Verify converted sector/block/device files exist and carry CR2W magic.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "output": "<output>"
    },
    "name": "wb_native_verify"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
outputYes
targetsNo
strict_magicNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the two checks (existence and CR2W magic) but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, what it returns on success or failure, how errors are reported, or what strict_magic changes.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the action and checks are stated immediately. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage across three parameters, the definition is incomplete for reliable invocation. It does not explain return values, failure behavior, or how output, targets, and strict_magic interact.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters, so the description must compensate. It gives domain context for checking files and magic, but never explains 'output', 'targets', or 'strict_magic', leaving their roles ambiguous.

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 uses a specific verb ('Verify') and names the resource ('converted sector/block/device files') plus the exact checks ('exist and carry CR2W magic'). It is clear what the tool does, but it does not differentiate itself from sibling verification tools such as wb_native_template_verify or wb_build_verify.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance; the only cue is the word 'converted', which implies a post-conversion check. It does not name alternatives like wb_native_template_verify or wb_build_verify, so an agent must infer routing.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools