Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TiledMCP

TiledMCP

by PengLx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

List Tiled project files

tiled_list_files
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists all Tiled assets including maps, tilesets, templates, worlds, and project files from the project root directory.

Instructions

Lists map, tileset, template, world and project assets under the configured project root.

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": "tiled_list_files"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral details beyond 'Lists'. No contradiction, but minimal added value.

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?

A single 16-word sentence directly stating purpose, no unnecessary words. Very concise.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has many siblings and a parameter that affects results. Missing details: recursion depth, scope of 'under the configured project root', effect of limit parameter, and differentiation from other list tools.

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 input schema has 1 parameter (limit) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the limit parameter's behavior or effect on results.

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 it lists specific asset types (maps, tilesets, templates, worlds, projects) under the project root. This distinguishes it from siblings like tiled_list_world_maps (world-only) or tiled_list_objects.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or avoid this tool compared to alternatives like tiled_list_world_maps or tiled_list_tile_names. Usage is implied as a generic project file listing, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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