Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Multiplayer Agent

by com.multiplayeragent
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set a game's live config

set_live_config
Idempotent

Set the game's live config: any JSON the game reads at runtime (drop rates, prices, difficulty, a banner, feature switches). It reaches rooms that are already running within ~15 seconds, with no redeploy and nobody disconnected; clients read it as mp.live.config, server logic as liveOps().config. Merges by default (a null value deletes a key); replace: true swaps the whole object. Active events' overrides apply on top. Max 8KB.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "config": "<config>"
    },
    "name": "set_live_config"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gameNoWhich game to act on: its publishable key (pk_…) or its exact name. Defaults to the x-mp-game header, then your primary game.
configYesJSON object to merge (or, with replace, to store).
replaceNoReplace the whole config instead of merging (default false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With annotations only covering safety/idempotency, the description adds substantial behavior: propagation within ~15 seconds to already-running rooms, no disconnects, how clients (mp.live.config) and server logic (liveOps().config) consume it, merge-by-default with null deleting a key, whole-object replacement via replace, active event overrides stacking on top, and an 8KB size cap. That is exactly the operational context annotations cannot convey.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, then merge/replace mechanics and the size cap, all in one tight paragraph with no filler. It is dense to the point of being slightly packed, which costs it the top score, but every clause carries real information.

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?

Covers purpose, propagation, consumption paths, merge/replace semantics, override precedence and size limits — enough to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps: what the call returns (no output schema) and what happens on validation failure or oversized payloads.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3; the description goes beyond the schema by explaining that a null value deletes a key, that replace:true swaps the entire object rather than merging, and by adding the 8KB limit that appears nowhere in the schema. The game parameter is left to the schema, which is fine given full coverage.

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 ('Set the game's live config') and immediately defines the resource's scope: arbitrary JSON read at runtime, with concrete examples (drop rates, prices, difficulty, banner, feature switches). It also implicitly separates itself from publish_game by noting no redeploy is needed.

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 makes clear what the tool does and how merge vs replace behave, which implies when to use it, but it never explicitly states when to choose this over siblings like publish_game, schedule_live_event, or get_live_ops, nor any preconditions. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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

All Multiplayer Agent toolsInspect
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