battle-training-mcp

upload_version

Upload JavaScript controller source as a new bot version, automatically smoke-tested before activation to catch errors prior to release.

Instructions

Upload JavaScript controller source as a new version; smoke-tested before activation.

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": {
      "bot": "<bot>",
      "label": "<label>",
      "source": "<source>"
    },
    "name": "upload_version"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bot`	Yes
`label`	Yes
`notes`	No
`source`	Yes	Full controller.js source

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 30, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the upload is smoke-tested before activation, which is meaningful beyond the schema, but it does not explain permissions, failure behavior, immutability, or what happens if the smoke test fails.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and an important behavioral note efficiently.

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-style tool with four parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low parameter documentation, the description is too sparse. It covers the upload purpose and smoke-test behavior but leaves parameter meanings, prerequisites, and post-call behavior largely undocumented.

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 only 25%, with just `source` documented as full controller.js source. The description does not clarify the roles of `bot`, `label`, or `notes`, so it does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: uploading JavaScript controller source as a new version. It is clear enough for an agent to distinguish it from sibling tools like get_bot or create_bot, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

It implies the tool is used to upload a new controller version, but does not state when to use it versus alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions such as whether the bot must already exist. No when-not guidance is provided.

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

Deploy Server