Detects whether WorldOption.sav exists in a Palworld save directory, indicating a dedicated server override of PalWorldSettings.ini.
Checks if WorldOption.sav is present in the save directory, which overrides PalWorldSettings.ini on dedicated servers.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| save_path | Yes | Path to the Palworld world save directory. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Checks if...present' clearly implies a read-only existence check, and the override note adds useful behavioral context. It does not specify the exact return value, but for a presence check that is strongly implied.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single focused sentence with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, and the important override context is included without bloating the text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter existence check, the description is complete: it names the file, the directory parameter, the server context, and the file's significance. The agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already fully describes the single parameter with 100% coverage. The description repeats 'save directory' but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states the exact verb ('Checks if...present'), the specific resource (WorldOption.sav in the save directory), and the meaningful consequence (override of PalWorldSettings.ini). This clearly separates it from the sibling tools like inspect_palworld_save or check_migration_readiness.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description identifies the relevant context: dedicated servers where WorldOption.sav may override PalWorldSettings.ini. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.