Skip to main content
Glama

Mhw

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Weapons

get_weapons
Read-onlyIdempotent

Browse Monster Hunter World weapons by type (e.g., 'Great Sword', 'Bow', 'Hammer'). Returns damage, elements, and rarity to match your playstyle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoFilter by weapon type. One of: great-sword, sword-and-shield, dual-blades, long-sword, hammer, hunting-horn, lance, gunlance, switch-axe, charge-blade, insect-glaive, light-bowgun, heavy-bowgun, bow. Omit to return all types.
limitNoMaximum number of weapons to return. Defaults to 20.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNumber of items returned.
itemsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of items returned.",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "description": "Weapon data from MHW database",
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "items",
+    "count"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "limit": 15,
+    "type": "great-sword"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "bow"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns damage, elements, and rarity, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination or default filtering. No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single sentence of about 25 words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. It earns its place by mentioning return fields, though the examples are inaccurate.

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?

Given a simple tool with two optional parameters, a fully described schema, and an output schema, the description is largely complete. However, the misleading type examples undermine overall completeness and usability, so it is not a perfect 5.

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?

The description's examples ('Great Sword', 'Bow', 'Hammer') do not match the schema's enum values ('great-sword', 'bow', 'hammer'), actively misleading parameter usage. While schema coverage is 100%, the incorrect examples provide negative value, so the score falls below the baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Browse Monster Hunter World weapons by type' with a specific verb and resource, and lists example types. It differentiates from sibling tools like get_armor and get_monsters by focusing on weapons.

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?

The description implies usage for browsing weapons by type, providing clear context about the domain and return fields. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a simple read tool.

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

All Mhw toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool groups heavily overlap: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and discover_tools all route to the same 5,798-tool catalog and compete for the same 'answer this question' use case. The Polymarket tools (bet_research, polymarket_edges, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edge_tracker) also all detect betting opportunities, making it easy to pick the wrong one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Naming conventions are mixed: verb_noun (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, validate_claim), noun_noun (entity_profile, polymarket_arbitrage), adjective_noun (recent_changes, deep_research), and get_* for the MHW tools. All names use snake_case, but there is no consistent structural pattern across the set.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is too many for a coherent server, and the bulk of them (31 tools) are unrelated to the server's apparent 'Mhw' identity, which covers only 4 Monster Hunter World tools. The set reads like three separate servers (MHW game data, Pipeworx research, Polymarket betting) merged into one.

Completeness1/5

For a server named 'Mhw', the MHW surface is severely incomplete: armor, monsters, skills, and weapons exist, but quests, items, decorations, crafting, and locations are missing. The non-MHW tools are broad but belong to a different domain, so the server does not come close to covering its apparent intended purpose.

Resources