Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Backpack Battles MCP

Backpack Battles MCP

by 53721222-gif
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

bpb_stop_here

End the current run and keep your wins when the ten-win survival prompt is visible; choose to stop instead of continuing.

Instructions

十胜提示时选择“到此为止”。仅在 state.survival.prompt_visible=true 时可用；结束本轮并保留胜场。

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": "bpb_stop_here"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the availability condition and the outcome ('ends this round and keeps wins'), but it does not state whether the action is irreversible, what happens if invoked when the prompt is not visible, or how errors are surfaced.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words. The usage condition and the effect are both front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter, annotation-free action tool, the description covers the trigger, availability gate, and outcome. It could be slightly more complete by clarifying its relationship to the sibling continue/choose-survival actions, but it is sufficient to call correctly.

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, so there is no parameter semantics to document; baseline score of 4 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 description names a specific action (choosing 'stop here' at the ten-win prompt) and states its effect: ending the current round while preserving wins. It is clearly a discrete game action, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like bpb_continue or bpb_choose_survival.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit precondition: only usable when state.survival.prompt_visible=true. This is a strong usage gate, but it does not name alternatives or explain what to use if the prompt is not visible.

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