Warcraft 3 MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Read WC3 map info

wc3_map_info

Extracts metadata from Warcraft III map files, including map name, author, description, players, playable area, script language, and flags.

Instructions

Parse war3map.w3i: map name, author, description, players, playable area, script language, flags, etc.

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>"
    },
    "name": "wc3_map_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mapPath`	Yes	Absolute path to the .w3x/.w3m map file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool parses a specific file and lists returned data, but does not mention error conditions (e.g., invalid file), read-only nature, or format of output. Basic transparency is achieved but lacks depth.

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 a single sentence that directly conveys the action and the key outputs. No extraneous words; it is optimally concise for the complexity of the tool.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and outputs. It lacks details on output format and error handling, but for a simple read-only tool, it provides sufficient context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% for mapPath, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that the tool extracts metadata from war3map.w3i, giving context to what the single parameter leads to. This goes beyond the schema's path description.

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's purpose: to parse the war3map.w3i file and extract specific metadata fields like map name, author, description, etc. It uses the specific verb 'Parse' and identifies the exact resource, making it distinct from siblings like wc3_read_file.

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 versus alternatives such as wc3_read_file or wc3_read_objects. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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