Spritulus Game Creator

update_part_class

Destructive

Update a part class by ID.

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": {
      "partClassId": "<partClassId>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "renderPosition": "<renderPosition>",
      "uiPosition": "<uiPosition>"
    },
    "name": "update_part_class"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes
`uiPosition`	Yes
`hasVariants`	No	Whether parts and styles in this class can have open/closed/other piece variants; unchanged when omitted.
`partClassId`	Yes
`rotatePointX`	No
`rotatePointY`	No
`renderPosition`	Yes
`parentPartClassId`	No
`canMirrorPartClassId`	No
`canRequirePartClassId`	No
`renderWithPartClassId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so mutation and risk are disclosed structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say which fields are overwritten versus preserved, that omitted fields stay unchanged (only the schema note on hasVariants hints at this), or what happens to child references.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single clean sentence with no waste, but its brevity comes from omitting information rather than from economy. There is no structure to front-load because there is almost no content.

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

Completeness1/5

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

An 11-parameter destructive mutation with four required fields, near-zero schema documentation, and no output schema demands far more than one sentence. An agent cannot determine required inputs or side effects from this definition.

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?

Schema description coverage is 9% across 11 parameters, so the description must compensate and it does not. "By ID" only confirms partClassId identifies the target and leaves ten other parameters, including the parent/mirror/require part-class references, entirely unexplained.

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

Purpose3/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("Update a part class"), which is more than a tautology. However, "by ID" understates the operation: four parameters are required, and nothing distinguishes this from siblings like update_part, update_piece, or update_style.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this versus update_part or update_element, no prerequisites, and no note that the class must already exist. The only implied usage is the need for an existing ID.

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

All Spritulus Game Creator 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?