Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
PoB PoE2 MCP

PoB PoE2 MCP

by Hecatoncheir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

pob_tree_hover

Read-only

Shows the original Lua tooltip and highlights the passive path and dependent nodes on hover, helping inspect a Path of Exile 2 build without changing it.

Instructions

Оригинальная подсказка Lua и готовая подсветка пути/зависимых узлов при наведении, без изменения сборки.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "pob_tree_hover"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
compareNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.15.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true is already declared, and the phrase 'without changing the build' reinforces the non-mutating nature, so behavior is consistent. It adds the useful detail that highlighting of the path and dependent nodes is produced, but says nothing about output format or how hover vs. compare modes behave.

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?

A single compact sentence with the key behavior front-loaded and no wasted clauses. Brevity works in its favor, though the terse phrasing leaves ambiguity that more text could have resolved.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a two-parameter read-only tool this is close to adequate, and the read-only guarantee is clear. However, with no output schema and an unexplained 'compare' flag, an agent cannot tell precisely what calling it yields compared to the sibling tooltip tool.

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 both parameters. The description never explains that 'id' identifies the hovered node or what the optional boolean 'compare' toggles, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented schema in a tool whose core input is the node id.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific behavior (tooltip plus path/dependent-node highlighting on hover) but never states the resource in agent terms or what is returned as data. It sits right next to the sibling pob_node_tooltip without explaining how the two differ, leaving node-id → tooltip selection ambiguous.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the near-identical sibling pob_node_tooltip. The agent is left to infer that this is for hover-preview of a passive tree node rather than reading a node's tooltip through the other tool.

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