Skip to main content
Glama
lukszi

SatisfactoryMCP

by lukszi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

power_shards

Calculate shard requirements for an overclock plan by reporting held, committed, and free counts, and whether the free pool covers the chosen machines and clock.

Instructions

Power Shards held, committed and free, plus what an overclock plan would cost.

plan_machines machines at plan_clock costs shards per machine; the answer says whether the free pool covers it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
saveNo
as_ofNopin to one world state: a sav:… token from an earlier answer
limitNomax rows (hard cap 25)
worldNo
offsetNo
plan_clockNo
plan_machinesNo

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"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "title": "Offset",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
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 discloses that the answer reports held, committed and free shards and whether the free pool covers a plan, but it does not state that this is a read-only query, nor does it describe pagination behavior or any side effects.

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 tight sentences with no filler. It front-loads the output content and then explains the overclock-plan computation, so every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 29% schema coverage, the description is too thin. It covers the core shard accounting and plan cost, but omits parameter guidance, read-only status, and pagination or return-shape details an agent would need.

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 29% (7 parameters, only as_of and limit have schema descriptions). The description adds meaning for plan_machines and plan_clock, but leaves save, world, offset, and the relationship between limit and offset unexplained, so it does not compensate for the low 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 states a specific resource (Power Shards) and what is reported: held, committed, free, and the cost of an overclock plan. It clearly tells an agent what the tool computes, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling power_report tool.

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?

Usage is implied by the explanation that plan_machines at plan_clock costs shards per machine and the answer says whether the free pool covers it. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no named alternative among the many sibling tools.

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