Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cp77wb-mcp

cp77wb-mcp

by 0xra0
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wb_semantic_build

Build deterministic local semantic tags and facets for a Cyberpunk 2077 World Builder asset catalog, using optional overrides to keep asset search and classification consistent.

Instructions

Build deterministic local semantic tags/facets over an existing World Builder asset catalog.

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": {
      "database": "<database>"
    },
    "name": "wb_semantic_build"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
databaseYes
overridesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful traits such as "deterministic" and "local," but does not explain whether it mutates or creates files, what happens to existing tags, permission requirements, or side effects—critical for a build operation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is appropriately concise, though its brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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?

For a two-parameter build tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the description is insufficient. It names the high-level purpose but omits parameter behavior, side effects, and invocation context needed to use the tool confidently.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description does not mention either parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, an agent gets no explanation of what `database` refers to or how `overrides` affects the build, leaving both parameters semantically opaque.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Build deterministic local semantic tags/facets over an existing World Builder asset catalog." This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from search-oriented siblings such as wb_semantic_search, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It implies an existing asset catalog is required, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools like wb_semantic_search, wb_assets_build, or wb_build_prepare. There are no exclusions or prerequisite details beyond the vague "existing catalog" phrase.

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