Herald.ink MCP

create_entity

Creates one entity from the JSON you wrote following get_generation_guide. Returns its id and Herald's validation report: fix blocking errors with update_entity, and weigh the warnings. Optional relationships link it to existing entities right away (each reported on its own; a refused link leaves the entity created). Requires the Editor role.

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": {
      "campaignId": "<campaignId>",
      "entityType": "<entityType>",
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "create_entity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	Yes	The entity's fields, matching the schema from get_generation_guide.
`campaignId`	Yes
`entityType`	Yes	Entity type: NPC, MONSTER, LOCATION, FACTION, ENCOUNTER, LORE, ITEM, QUEST, PLAYER, PARTY or SESSION.
`relationships`	No	Optional. Relationships from the new entity to existing ones, e.g. [{"type": "LOCATED_AT", "targetId": "<location id>"}]. The generation guide lists the types this entity can start.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: it returns the new id and a validation report, distinguishes blocking errors from warnings, discloses the authorization requirement (Editor role), and — most importantly — explains partial-success semantics where a refused relationship leaves the entity created.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its prerequisite, then return behavior, then the optional relationships caveat, then the auth constraint. Nothing is redundant with the schema or annotations.

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 no output schema, the description correctly compensates by describing the return payload (id plus Herald's validation report) and how to act on it. It also covers permissions and partial-failure behavior, which is everything an agent needs to invoke this mutation safely.

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 75%, and the description adds real meaning on top: `data` must be shaped per get_generation_guide, and `relationships` are evaluated individually with per-link reporting rather than atomically. campaignId is left unexplained, but its purpose is largely self-evident from the name.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: "Creates one entity from the JSON you wrote following get_generation_guide." The singular "one entity" plus the explicit reference to get_generation_guide separates it cleanly from update_entity, set_relationship, and bulk/read siblings.

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?

Names the prerequisite workflow (get_generation_guide) and the follow-up alternative for failures (update_entity). It does not state an explicit when-not-to-use case, e.g. that existing entities should be modified with update_entity rather than recreated, so it stops just short of full routing guidance.

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

All Herald.ink MCP 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?