Skip to main content
Glama

Gamedev Tavern — MCP for the game industry

by games.entri
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Править карточку

edit_profile_card
DestructiveIdempotent

Edit card facts, the «О себе» story (about), company or role; publish or take down the public page. Others see it: only use facts the human may share.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addNo[{fact_type, label}]: need, capability, visitor_pain, proof, topic, constraint…
editNo[{id, label}]: correct a fact by id; a card value: add the new text + remove its ref
pageNoPublic page: publish/index true|false, refresh = rebuild, address = /people/<name>
roleNoThe person's role in their words (e.g. «продюсер»), ≤40 chars; kept as said
aboutNoWhat to change in the «О себе» story, in plain words; the Tavern AI rewrites it
removeNo[id|ref]: delete facts by id, card values by ref: off the card, matching, memory
wait_sNoSeconds to wait for the result, 0-20; not done in time: 202 + operation_status
companyNoCompany or studio in the person's words, ≤60 chars; kept as said
request_keyYesIdempotency key: reuse it on retry, new per action

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / edit / description
      Previous value: -"[{id, label}]: correct a fact by its id from profile_card"New value: +"[{id, label}]: correct a fact by id; a card value: add the new text + remove its ref"
    • changedInput schema / properties / remove / description
      Previous value: -"[id]: delete facts (ids from profile_card): off the card, matching and agent memory"New value: +"[id|ref]: delete facts by id, card values by ref: off the card, matching, memory"
    • changedInput schema / properties / remove / items / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +[
+  "integer",
+  "string"
+]
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / company
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Company or studio in the person's words, ≤60 chars; kept as said",
+  "maxLength": 60,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / remove / description
      Previous value: -"[id]: take facts off the card and out of matching, ids from profile_card"New value: +"[id]: delete facts (ids from profile_card): off the card, matching and agent memory"
    • changedInput schema / properties / request_key / description
      Previous value: -"Your idempotency key, 16-128 of [A-Za-z0-9_:-]; reuse it on retry, new per action"New value: +"Idempotency key: reuse it on retry, new per action"
    • addedInput schema / properties / role
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The person's role in their words (e.g. «продюсер»), ≤40 chars; kept as said",
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and non-read-only, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two genuinely new pieces of context: that the page is publicly visible ('Others see it') and that publishing/taking down changes that visibility, plus the caution about shareable facts. It does not discuss the async/202 behavior or the effect of removals, but those are in the schema.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with the edit surface and ending with the visibility caution. No filler, no restatement of the title, every clause earns its place.

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?

For a nine-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the edit surface and the public-visibility consequence, which are the non-obvious parts. The remaining mechanics (idempotency key, wait_s/202, item shapes) are fully specified in the schema, so nothing critical is missing from an agent's point of view.

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 schema already documents all nine parameters in detail (including add/edit/remove item shapes and wait_s semantics). The description only echoes the 'about/company/role' topics and the publish/take-down notion, adding essentially nothing beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb (Edit) and enumerates the resources it touches: card facts, the «О себе» story, company, role, and the public page's publish/take-down state. That is enough to distinguish it from most siblings, but it never names profile_card (the read counterpart) or edit_company_team, so differentiation is left implicit.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the mutation path for a profile card, and the closing line adds a content constraint ('only use facts the human may share'). There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not, and no sibling such as profile_card or edit_company_team is named as the alternative.

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

All Gamedev Tavern — MCP for the game industry 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