Stormworks MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

open_in_viewer

Open a saved or workshop Stormworks vehicle in an interactive 3D browser viewer, with design and body selection support. Use it to inspect hull, land, or imported drafts before editing.

Instructions

Open a vehicle in the interactive 3D viewer in the player's web browser.

name: saved vehicle or installed numeric workshop item (source=workshop). design supports hull/land/imported drafts. Uses installed component meshes, with explicit fallbacks. For articulated references choose body_id; otherwise shows the largest body alone.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	No
`spec`	No
`patch`	No
`design`	No
`preset`	No
`source`	No	vehicles
`body_id`	No
`spec_path`	No
`diagnostics`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.1Oct 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / body_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Body Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / diagnostics

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "title": "Diagnostics",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / source

Added value: +{
+  "default": "vehicles",
+  "title": "Source",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Oct 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add some behavioral context: rendering uses installed component meshes with explicit fallbacks, and articulated references collapse to the largest body if body_id is omitted. However, it omits whether the action is read-only, whether it requires a running game/browser session, and 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and the follow-up notes are compact. The second paragraph is slightly run-on but every line carries information; nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but with 9 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the definition should do far more. It leaves half the parameters and the safety/session profile unspecified.

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 0% across 9 parameters, and the description only clarifies name, source=workshop, design, and body_id. spec, patch, preset, spec_path, and diagnostics remain entirely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving a substantial gap.

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 and resource with a clear modality: 'Open a vehicle in the interactive 3D viewer in the player's web browser.' This tells an agent exactly what happens, though it never explicitly differentiates itself from sibling preview/inspect tools such as preview_vehicle or inspect_view.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named among the many preview/inspect siblings. The only conditional ('For articulated references choose body_id') is parameter selection, not tool selection, so an agent gets no routing help.

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

Deploy Server