Skip to main content
Glama
lukszi

SatisfactoryMCP

by lukszi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

name_factory

Name a set of machines and persist it for this world. Calling again with the same name re-anchors it to the current selection.

Instructions

Name a set of machines and persist it for this world.

The label stores the machine instance ids, which are stable across saves, so it survives moving machines, adding to the factory, and autosave rotation. Calling this again with the same name RE-ANCHORS it to the current selection, dropping every machine the new selector misses -- amend_factory adds or drops a few without that, and rename_factory changes the name without touching the membership.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
saveNo
as_ofNopin to one world state: a sav:… token from an earlier answer
notesNo
splitNokeep only the largest spatial cluster
worldNo
expandNopull in everything belted to the result
selectYesselector terms, ANDed. product:<item> | recipe:<name> | building:<class or name> | near:<place>@<radius_m> | base:<n> | line:<n> | slab:<n> | proposal:<n> | label:<name> | machine:<instance> | all. Terms are ANDed; comma-separated values inside one term are ORed; prefix a term with '-' to exclude it
dry_runNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / as_of
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "pin to one world state: a sav:… token from an earlier answer",
+  "title": "As Of"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / select / description
      Previous value: -"selector terms, ANDed. product:<item> | recipe:<name> | building:<class or name> | near:<x,y@radius_m or label@radius_m> | base:<n> | line:<n> | slab:<n> | proposal:<n> | label:<name> | all. Terms are ANDed; comma-separated values inside one term are ORed; prefix a term with '-' to exclude it"New value: +"selector terms, ANDed. product:<item> | recipe:<name> | building:<class or name> | near:<place>@<radius_m> | base:<n> | line:<n> | slab:<n> | proposal:<n> | label:<name> | machine:<instance> | all. Terms are ANDed; comma-separated values inside one term are ORed; prefix a term with '-' to exclude it"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses that membership is stored as stable instance ids surviving moves/autosave rotation, and warns that the same-name call is destructive to prior membership. It does not cover permissions, rate/latency, or what dry_run actually returns, which for a 9-param mutation tool is a real but smaller gap.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then persistence rationale, then the destructive re-anchor warning and sibling contrasts. No filler; every sentence carries distinct information.

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?

For a 9-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the headline behavior and the destructive case well but omits dry_run, save/world scoping, and any hint of the return value (e.g. a label token). Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 only 44%, so the description must compensate, and it partially does by explaining the semantics of `name` (a label over stable instance ids) and the re-anchor behavior tied to `select`. But it says nothing about save, world, notes, or dry_run, leaving nearly half the parameters documented in neither place.

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?

States a specific verb (name) and resource (a set of machines) plus the persistence effect ('persist it for this world'). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the two nearest siblings, amend_factory and rename_factory, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names both alternatives and the condition that selects each: re-calling with the same name re-anchors and drops non-matching machines, amend_factory adds/drops a few, rename_factory changes only the name. That is explicit when-to-use/when-to-use-something-else guidance rather than inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools