Skip to main content
Glama
SaltfishSheep

CNPC JavaDoc MCP Server

Search CNPC JavaDoc

search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find CustomNPCs JavaDoc API methods, fields, and class hierarchies across Minecraft versions and forks using a flexible boolean expression syntax.

Instructions

Search CustomNPCs (CNPC) JavaDoc API — methods and fields across versions and forks.

expression syntax: term — case-insensitive substring term:modifier — substring match in column; term::modifier — exact match in column a&b (AND) | a|b (OR) | {expr} (grouping). & has higher precedence than |. "noppes.npcs.api.entity.ICustomNpc" auto-expands to "/" and "$" paths.

Modifiers: all (default) — all columns class — class (full path) classname — class name after last '/' package — package before last '/' name — name (methods+fields) method — same column, methods only field — same column, fields only desc — desc (JVM descriptor) modifier — access, is_static side — sideonly (always common for CNPC)

Scoring: exact case hit = 1.0, case-insensitive = 0.5, then by mismatch (less unmatched chars ranks higher).

Common patterns: "ICustomNpc::classname" → exact class name only "Script:classname" → all classes containing "Script" "noppes/npcs/api/entity:package" → all classes under a package "health:field" → fields only, no methods "()Z:desc" → methods returning boolean "get:method&static::modifier" → static methods containing "get" output="%class%" → deduplicated class list

Version format: "1.12.2" for standard, "cnpc+:1.7.10" for CustomNPC+ fork.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number (1-indexed). Default: 1
limitNoNumber of results per page (default: 20, max: 100)
outputNoOutput format template using %variable% syntax (case-insensitive). Variables: %type%, %class% (full class path), %name% (method/field name), %desc% (JVM descriptor), %access%, %is_static% (static/non-static), %sideonly%, %match%, %mismatch%. Consecutive spaces collapsed. Identical outputs deduplicated.[%type%] %class%/%name% %desc% %access% %is_static% %sideonly%
expressionYesBoolean search expression (case-insensitive, exact case match scores higher). Syntax: term, term:modifier (substring match in column), term::modifier (exact match in column), a&b (AND), a|b (OR), {expr} (grouping with braces). Modifiers: all, class, classname, package, name, method, field, desc, modifier, side. & has higher precedence than |. Examples: "Entity::classname", "walk:method&static::modifier", "noppes/npcs/api/entity:package"
mc_versionYesMinecraft version to search (e.g. "1.12.2", "1.20.1"). Supported: 1.10.2, 1.11.2, 1.12.2, 1.16.5, 1.18.2, 1.20.1, 1.7.10, 1.8.9, 1.9.4, BetaZavr:1.12.2, BetaZavr:1.20.1, cnpc+:1.7.10
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details like scoring, output deduplication, and format templates, enhancing transparency beyond 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 well-structured with clear sections for syntax, modifiers, scoring, patterns, and version format. Every sentence serves a purpose, and it is appropriately sized for the complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and complex query syntax, the description covers all necessary details: syntax, modifiers, scoring, common patterns, version format, and output template. No gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 100% schema coverage, the description still adds substantial value by explaining expression syntax in depth, listing modifiers, providing examples, and detailing output variables, far exceeding baseline.

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 tool searches the CNPC JavaDoc API for methods and fields across versions and forks, distinguishing it from the sibling 'show-hierarchy' which likely displays hierarchy instead of searching.

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?

The description provides extensive usage guidelines with syntax, modifiers, scoring, and common patterns. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use compared to the sibling, but the detail effectively guides correct usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/SaltfishSheep/AI-MCP-CNPCAPIAccess'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server