Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
掌锤公开查询 MCP

掌锤公开查询 MCP

by Vper496
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_dataset_manifest

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves the statistical dataset manifest for Warhammer 40K public queries, defaulting to v2 with v1 fallback. Supports optional release ID and dataset revision pinning.

Instructions

查看统计包。默认请求v2；旧服务明确报不支持时，可选v1读取原三张表。

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": "get_dataset_manifest"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schemaNopublic-query-dataset/2
release_idNo
dataset_revisionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral fact: v1 is a fallback path that reads only the original three tables, implying capability differences between schemas. It says nothing about response shape or failure modes beyond that.

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?

Two short clauses, front-loaded with the action and then the schema selection rule; no padding. Efficiency is good, though the payoff is limited by how little it says.

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?

With no output schema and no annotation-level detail on return values, the description should explain what a manifest contains and what release_id/dataset_revision select. It does neither, leaving an agent unable to form valid non-default calls.

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 carries the full burden, yet it only explains the `schema` enum (v2 default, v1 fallback) and leaves `release_id` and `dataset_revision` — both unlabeled 64-hex strings — completely unexplained. Two of three parameters remain opaque.

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?

"查看统计包" (view the statistics package) conveys the general resource but is fuzzy about what a "manifest" actually is and what it returns. It never distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_dataset_rows or get_data_notes, so an agent must infer which of the dataset-related tools to pick.

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?

It gives a clear rule for choosing between the v2 and v1 schema values (default v2, fall back to v1 only when the old service explicitly reports unsupported). That is useful parameter-level guidance, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool at all versus the sibling tools.

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