掌锤公开查询 MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_dataset_rows

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a paginated page from published Warhammer 40K statistical tables. Query the matching schema manifest first, then pin release_id and dataset_revision for consistent, reproducible results.

Instructions

读取统计表的一页；先查相同schema的manifest，再固定release_id和dataset_revision。

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": {
      "table": "<table>"
    },
    "name": "get_dataset_rows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`page`	No
`table`	Yes
`schema`	No	public-query-dataset/2
`release_id`	No
`dataset_revision`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.4.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful sequencing constraint that release_id and dataset_revision must be resolved via the manifest first. It does not explain what happens when those are null (the default) or any pagination/volume limits.

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 compact clauses, front-loaded with the verb and resource before the prerequisite. No filler; the only cost is that the compression leaves key semantics implicit.

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?

There is no output schema and 5 params at 0% schema coverage, so the description should carry more. Missing: whether release_id and dataset_revision are both required or alternatives, what null defaults do, and any hint of the returned payload's shape.

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 0%, so the description has to compensate and it only partly does: it names schema, release_id and dataset_revision and says the schema must match the manifest lookup. It says nothing about `page`, `table`, or the relationship/optionality between release_id and dataset_revision.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('读取统计表的一页' – read one page of a statistics table), which clearly separates it from the manifest/notes/report siblings. It does not enumerate the tables available, but that is carried by the enum in 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 Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit prerequisite workflow: first look up the manifest for the same schema, then pin release_id and dataset_revision. That is real routing guidance for an agent. It stops short of saying when NOT to use it or how it differs from get_report/get_matchups.

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

Deploy Server