war-selection-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

game_data_query

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query War Selection game JSON files by path or regex key search to inspect gameplay, visual, and interface data without manual file parsing.

Instructions

Query Cache/Projects/WarSelection JSON (gameplay, visual, legacyIds, preload, styles, main, render, interfaces/...). Use path like 'build[10].costBuilding' or 'auras.0', or key_search (regex over keys and string values).

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": {
      "file": "<file>"
    },
    "name": "game_data_query"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file`	Yes
`path`	No
`limit`	No
`max_chars`	No
`key_search`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Oct 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful fact that key_search runs as a regex over keys and string values, but says nothing about result truncation (max_chars), result size (limit), or behavior when the path is invalid.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and then the two useful usage hints. No wasted filler, though the file-category parenthetical is a somewhat noisy enumeration.

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?

No output schema exists, so return shape is unaddressed, and with five parameters and the required `file` unexplained, an agent cannot reliably know which file strings are valid or how limit/max_chars shape the response. Adequate for the path/key_search workflow but incomplete for full invocation.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and it does explain `path` syntax and `key_search` semantics with examples. However `file` values, `limit`, and `max_chars` (truncation behavior) are left entirely undocumented, so it only compensates for two of five parameters.

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 (Query) and resource (Cache/Projects/WarSelection JSON), and enumerates the JSON file categories (gameplay, visual, main, render, interfaces/...), which distinguishes it from siblings like search_api and search_guide. The only gap is that the wording 'Query ... JSON' is slightly loose about whether it reads or writes.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives concrete usage syntax for `path` ('build[10].costBuilding', 'auras.0') and `key_search`, which is real guidance on how to call it. It never states when to prefer this over the sibling search tools (search_api, unit_lookup, game_info), so the when-to-use comparison is left to inference.

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