Skip to main content
Glama
Koodattu

wow-addon-api-mcp

by Koodattu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

search_api

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search World of Warcraft API names and official documentation within a chosen patch and game channel. Find functions, events, and other API elements by name or documentation term.

Instructions

Search API names and official documentation text within one patch in the selected channel. Exact and prefix matches rank first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindNoOptional result category
limitNoMaximum results
queryYesName fragment or documentation term
channelYesGame channel; never inferred from a version number
versionYesPatch, full client build, build number, or latest within the selected channel

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / channel
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Game channel; never inferred from a version number",
+  "enum": [
+    "retail",
+    "forever"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / version / description
      Previous value: -"Retail patch, full client build, build number, or latest"New value: +"Patch, full client build, build number, or latest within the selected channel"
    • addedInput schema / properties / version / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "query"
-]New value: +[
+  "query",
+  "channel",
+  "version"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the ranking behavior (exact and prefix matches first) and the scoping to a single patch and channel, which is useful. However, it does not disclose return format or pagination behavior, which would add more value beyond the annotations.

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 concise sentences with zero waste. The core purpose and ranking behavior are front-loaded, and it does not repeat information already present in the schema or annotations.

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?

Given the schema covers all parameters and annotations cover safety, the description is adequate but sparse. It does not describe the result format (e.g., list of matches with documentation excerpts) or any limitations beyond the ranking. For a search tool with no output schema, a bit more detail on return structure would improve completeness, but it is not critically deficient.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds minimal parameter-specific meaning, only echoing the scoping (patch, channel) without introducing new semantics. With high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'search' and the resource: API names and official documentation text, scoped to a patch and channel. It also mentions the ranking behavior (exact and prefix matches first), which distinguishes it from generic search tools. This is specific and differentiates it from siblings like search_resources.

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?

The description gives clear context on what it searches (within a patch/channel) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions. There is no mention of 'use instead of X' or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from the scope.

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