Warcraft 3 MCP Server

by YElwiddi

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Delete camera(s)

wc3_delete_camera

Remove cameras from a Warcraft III map by specifying the camera name or index. Saves the map after deletion.

Instructions

Remove the camera(s) matched by name or index. Saves the map.

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": {
      "mapPath": "<mapPath>",
      "select": "<select>"
    },
    "name": "wc3_delete_camera"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mapPath`	Yes	Absolute path to the .w3x/.w3m map file
`select`	Yes	Which camera(s) to delete — provide name or index
`outPath`	No	Output map path. Defaults to "<map>.edited.<ext>" beside the source; pass the source path to overwrite in place.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'Saves the map' but omits other behavioral traits like irreversibility, write permissions needed, or that existing cameras may be required. The destructive nature is implied but not fully disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, 12 words, front-loaded purpose, no wasted information. Highly concise and clear.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks important context: it doesn't mention irreversibility, validation of mapPath, or that the tool modifies the file. The agent may not have enough information to use it safely.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds little beyond what is already in the schema. It confirms selection by name or index but does not clarify behavior if both are provided. Adequate but not enhancing.

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 'Remove' and resource 'camera', and defines matching criteria (name or index). It distinguishes from sibling tools like wc3_add_camera and wc3_read_cameras effectively.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., wc3_read_cameras for viewing, wc3_add_camera for adding). No usage context or prerequisites are given.

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