Warcraft 3 MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Read the import table

wc3_read_imports

List custom imported files (models, textures, sounds) declared in a Warcraft III map's war3map.imp. Enables retrieval or replacement via related tools.

Instructions

List custom imported files declared in war3map.imp (models, textures, sounds, …). Their bytes are reachable via wc3_read_file / wc3_replace_file.

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_read_imports"
  }
}

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

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It indicates read-only listing behavior but does not disclose error cases, performance implications, or permission requirements. The mention of 'custom imported files' implies non-destructive, but more detail is needed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and a useful follow-up on related tools. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 no output schema, the description could clarify the output format (e.g., list of file paths or names). It mentions 'list' and references related tools, which partially compensates. However, the output nature is ambiguous, leaving a minor gap.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'mapPath' fully described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation but not exceeding it.

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 lists custom imported files from war3map.imp, specifying types like models, textures, sounds. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning file bytes are accessible via wc3_read_file/wc3_replace_file, implying this tool is for listing only.

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 informs that imported file bytes are reachable via wc3_read_file/wc3_replace_file, guiding the agent to use those tools after listing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternative tools beyond the referenced ones.

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