Skip to main content
Glama

Embers: Tabletop RPG Toolkit

Add a spell to a campaign's allowlist

play_add_campaign_spell

Add a vault spell to a campaign's allowlist. The spell always lands on the leg matching the SPELL'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. Caller must have 'contribute' on the campaign.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rulesetNoOptional 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.
spellIdYesVault document id (`spellId`). Required.
campaignIdYesCampaign id.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the non-retargeting leg placement rule, two 400 error cases, and a specific auth requirement. This is meaningful behavioral context that the structured annotations do not provide.

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 short sentences, each carrying load: action, placement rule, ruleset caveat, and auth requirement. The main behavior is front-loaded and there is 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?

For a mutating tool with full schema descriptions and an output schema, the description covers prerequisites, failure conditions, auth, and edge-case behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to use 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% and the ruleset property already explains its confirmation-only role and mismatch behavior. The description restates this caveat rather than adding new parameter semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with 'Add a vault spell to a campaign's allowlist', clearly naming the verb, resource, and destination. This differentiates it from sibling add-to-campaign tools (item/rule/character) and from the inverse removal tool.

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 gives concrete preconditions: the campaign must already have a leg for the spell's ruleset or a 400 is returned, and the caller needs 'contribute' permission. It also clarifies when to use the optional ruleset param, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling add tools.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources