dzstudio-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

world_objects

Query buildings, trees, rocks, and project objects within a circle or rectangle, optionally filtered by class or flags, with paginated results of 500.

Instructions

Static map objects (buildings, trees, rocks, walls) and project objects in a circle (X, Z, radius in m) or rectangle, optionally by class or flags (1 building, 2 tree, 4 bush, 8 rock, 256 house): id, source (map or project), class, model, position, orientation [yaw, pitch, roll], scale, distance, size [X, Y, Z] or "box unknown". An object counts if its box touches the area. Pages of 500.

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": "world_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`map`	No	Map key (chernarus, livonia, sakhal, badlands …) or world name; default: the map of the session
`near`	No
`page`	No
`rect`	No
`class`	No
`flags`	No
`source`	No
`session`	No	Session handle (s1, s2 …) or session id; default: the current session

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.3Nov 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

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 it does disclose useful traits: the inclusion rule ('An object counts if its box touches the area'), the 500-item page size, and the possibility of a 'box unknown' size. It still omits whether the tool is strictly read-only, what happens when neither area nor filters are supplied, and how paging terminates.

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?

Roughly 55 words covering eight parameters with no filler, and the resource type is front-loaded. The structure is cramped, though, with the flag table and return-field list stuffed into parentheticals that make the sentence hard to parse on first read.

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?

The description does list the return fields, which partly compensates for the missing output schema, and it explains the spatial inclusion rule. For a tool with eight optional parameters and nested objects, it should also say what an unfiltered call returns and whether near and rect are mutually exclusive.

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?

Schema coverage is only 25%, and the description compensates well in places: it gives units (radius in m), decodes the bit flags (1 building, 2 tree, 4 bush, 8 rock, 256 house) that the schema leaves as a bare integer, and ties 'page' to the 500-object page size. It leaves rect coordinate units and the near-vs-rect relationship unexplained, so it is not complete.

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 names a specific resource (static map objects such as buildings, trees, rocks, walls, plus project objects) and the spatial filters (circle or rectangle, class or flags) that define the query. The verb is only implied by the noun phrase, and nothing distinguishes it from the sibling query_objects, so it stops short of a 5.

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 spatial framing: it is the tool for enumerating world/project objects inside a circle or rectangle. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over query_objects, no when-not conditions, and no note on whether near and rect are alternatives or combinable.

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