Embers: Tabletop RPG Toolkit

Add a rule to a campaign's allowlist

play_add_campaign_rule

Add a vault rule to a campaign's allowlist. The rule always lands on the leg matching the RULE's own ruleset — the campaign must have a leg for that ruleset or play answers 400. The optional ruleset param never retargets; it only confirms the expected leg, and a mismatch answers 400 (e.g. "This rule is X, not Y"). Caller must have 'contribute' on the campaign.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ruleId`	Yes	Vault document id (`ruleId`). Required.
`ruleset`	No	Optional confirmation of the target leg's ruleset. The entity always lands on the leg matching its OWN ruleset — this param never retargets; when present, play verifies it matches that leg and answers 400 on a mismatch. Omit unless you want the placement double-checked.
`campaignId`	Yes	Campaign id.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 27, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / ruleset / enum

Removed value: -[
-  "5th Edition",
-  "5e24",
-  "PFRPG",
-  "PFRPG2",
-  "PF Playtest",
-  "Savage Worlds",
-  "Savage Embers",
-  "Solarian Conflict",
-  "Embers RPG",
-  "Universal",
-  "Fate Core",
-  "Fate Accelerated"
-]

addedInput schema / properties / ruleset / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

First observedSep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the write/safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), so the description only needs to add context — and it does: the leg-matching rule, the 400 failure mode, and the required 'contribute' permission. Non-obvious behavior around the ruleset param is disclosed well.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, then leg behavior, param semantics, and permission. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With an output schema present, return values needn't be described. The description covers placement behavior, error conditions, and authorization, leaving nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the ruleset confirmation semantics that the schema already documents in full; it adds emphasis but little new meaning beyond the structured field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a vault rule to a campaign's allowlist'), which is unmistakably distinct from siblings like play_remove_campaign_rule or play_add_campaign_item. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear preconditions: the campaign must have a leg matching the rule's own ruleset, and the caller needs 'contribute'. It stops short of naming an explicit alternative or exclusion, but the situational context is strong.

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

All Embers: Tabletop RPG Toolkit tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?