Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
zandronum-mcp

zandronum-mcp

by rc4l
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Load a savegame

load_game

Restore a saved game by name, resuming gameplay from a previous checkpoint. Specify the saved game's name to load it directly in the Zandronum engine.

Instructions

Run load to restore a savegame by name.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "load_game"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
instanceNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.6.0
  2. Removedv0.4.3
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states 'restore' implying a state change, but does not mention whether it overwrites current state, requires an active instance, or has side effects. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single sentence, concise and front-loaded. The phrase 'Run `load`' is somewhat redundant with the tool name, but it does convey the underlying command. Overall, it is efficiently written without excess.

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?

Given the tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the `instance` parameter, return values, or any prerequisites (e.g., a running game instance). This makes the tool incomplete for an agent to invoke correctly in varied contexts.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It mentions 'by name' for the `name` parameter but entirely ignores the `instance` parameter. Since instance is not self-explanatory and the schema provides no description, the agent is left guessing its purpose.

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 clearly states the action: 'restore a savegame by name', with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like save_game and list_saves by focusing on loading, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

The usage is implied: use this when you want to restore a saved game. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which sibling tools might be more appropriate, leaving some ambiguity.

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