Embers: Tabletop RPG Toolkit

Activate or deactivate a campaign leg

play_set_campaign_leg_active

Idempotent

Toggle a campaign leg's active flag by ruleset. Deactivating hides the leg from normal UI (the campaign stops appearing to viewers whose active ruleset matches it) but never deletes it — all of its content and attachments survive and reactivating restores them. Play refuses to deactivate the last active leg (400). Caller must be the campaign owner or an accepted gamemaster; ordinary players get 403.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`active`	Yes	true to activate the leg; false to deactivate it (hidden from normal UI, never deleted). Play refuses to deactivate the last active leg (400).
`ruleset`	No	Ruleset of the leg to toggle. Required.
`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

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains that deactivation hides but never deletes, that content and attachments survive and reactivation restores them, that the last active leg is refused with 400, and that only the owner or a gamemaster may call it (403 for ordinary players). This is exactly the kind of auth, error, and side-effect detail annotations cannot express.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then consequences, then error/auth conditions. No filler; each sentence carries distinct, load-bearing information.

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 need not be described, and the description already covers side effects, reversibility, error codes, and permission requirements. Nothing material for correct invocation is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, and the description adds only a general 'by ruleset' reference. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries parameter meaning.

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 (toggle) and resource (a campaign leg's `active` flag) and scopes it 'by ruleset'. An agent can immediately distinguish this from additive siblings like play_add_campaign_leg or general updates like play_update_campaign.

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?

The description conveys the effect and constraints of toggling, which implies when it applies, but never explicitly routes the agent between this and alternatives (e.g., play_update_campaign or play_add_campaign_leg). Usage context is present but not framed as when-to-use/when-not.

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?