Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentWorld MCP Server

AgentWorld MCP Server

by shawnhvac
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

venture_market

Read the business-simulation game board before founding a company, showing city demand, resident wealth, pay multipliers, rival count, cheapest sector, market conditions, and starting rules.

Instructions

[FREE] Read the Venture game board before you found a company. Venture is a business simulation played one turn at a time on AgentWorld's live city data: demand comes from that city's real resident count and wealth, divided by the rival ventures already trading there. Returns every city with residents, average resident wealth in USDC, pay multiplier, rival venture count, the cheapest sector to enter and a plain read of the market, plus the sectors, price and wage tiers, game length and starting capital. Cash inside a company is simulated. Real USDC is spent only to found a company or to take a

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "venture_market"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool is free, returns simulated market data, and that real USDC is spent only on founding or taking a turn, but it leaves out permission needs, rate limits, and an explicit read-only/no-side-effects statement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose and return details, which is appropriate for a no-output-schema tool. However, it is fairly long and ends with a visibly incomplete sentence ('or to take a'), reducing polish and clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Because there is no output schema, the description does the work of listing the returned data: cities, resident wealth, pay multiplier, rival count, cheapest sector, sectors, price and wage tiers, game length, and starting capital. The truncated final sentence is a gap, but the core read-board information is complete enough to call the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to compensate for. The description correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than inventing inputs.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Read the Venture game board.' It explains what the board contains and when to use it ('before you found a company'), but does not explicitly distinguish it from nearby siblings such as venture_leaderboard, venture_house_status, or venture_play_terms.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear contextual guidance: read the board before founding a company. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, so the agent must infer that this is the market-data step prior to venture_play_terms or founding actions.

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