wardogs-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

set_pose

Set a piece's absolute position and yaw in a forward operating base layout. Provide x, y, z coordinates and yaw to place components precisely.

Instructions

Set a piece's absolute position and/or yaw.

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": {
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "set_pose"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`x`	No
`y`	No
`z`	No
`key`	Yes
`yaw`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.3Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the operation sets absolute position/yaw and supports partial specification, but it does not explain the coordinate frame, units for yaw, whether omitted values are preserved or reset, prerequisites, or side effects.

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 filler. It communicates the core action and the optionality of position/yaw efficiently.

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 tool with five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too thin. An agent lacks essential context such as coordinate system, yaw units, required key semantics, expected response, and error behavior, making correct invocation uncertain.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only loosely maps x/y/z to position and yaw to yaw. It does not clarify the meaning of the required 'key' parameter, numeric ranges, units, defaults, or how partial updates behave when some position fields are omitted.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('a piece'), and specifies the exact properties being modified: absolute position and yaw. The word 'absolute' differentiates it from relative movement tools such as 'move', making the tool's purpose clear without opening the schema.

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 term 'absolute position' implies this tool is for setting exact coordinates rather than moving relative to the current pose, and the 'and/or' suggests partial updates are allowed. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over sibling tools like 'move', nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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