argo-mcp

Create campaign

create_campaign

Create a new Argo campaign. The current user becomes GM and the calling token gains read+write access to the new campaign immediately (no re-consent needed). Requires the campaign.create OAuth scope, granted at consent time.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ruleSystem`	Yes	Rule system the campaign uses. E.g. 'Dungeons & Dragons 5e', 'Pathfinder 2e', 'Forbidden Lands'. Free-form; the WebAPI derives the slug from this.
`description`	Yes	Short description of the campaign's setting, tone, and premise.
`campaignName`	Yes	Display name of the campaign.
`gameSystemSlug`	No	Optional explicit slug for the public URL (e.g. 'dnd5e'). If omitted, the server derives one from ruleSystem.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`ruleSystem`	No
`accessLevel`	No
`campaignName`	Yes
`gameMasterId`	Yes
`gameSystemSlug`	No
`coGameMasterIds`	No
`campaignDescription`	No

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the minimal annotations by disclosing the OAuth scope requirement, the current user becoming GM, and the calling token gaining read+write access immediately without re-consent. These are concrete behavioral traits not captured by readOnlyHint/destructiveHint false values.

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?

The description is only two sentences but packs in the core action, side effects, access implications, and a prerequisite. Every sentence is informative with no fluff, and the key verb+object is front-loaded.

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?

For a create tool with an output schema and 100% parameter description coverage, the description covers the critical contextual aspects: ownership, permission changes, and required OAuth scope. It does not need to explain return values due to the output schema, and it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema already explains all four parameters with per-property descriptions. The tool description adds no information about the parameters, leaving the schema to carry the burden, which is acceptable per baseline.

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?

The description opens with 'Create a new Argo campaign,' using a specific verb and resource. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like create_session or update_campaign, and the immediate consequences (becoming GM, token access) reinforce the unique purpose of this tool.

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 implies use for initial campaign creation and states a prerequisite ('Requires the campaign.create OAuth scope'), but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to update_campaign. There is clear context without explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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

All argo-mcp tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose. The mnemon tools are separated by type (NPC, Location, Quest, etc.), and other domains like guild, forum, and friend management are also well-segmented. No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case. Some minor deviations: 'describe_mnemon_types' instead of 'list_mnemon_types', and 'invite_user_by_email' has a slightly different structure. Overall quite consistent.

Tool Count3/5

With 63 tools, the server is quite heavy. While each tool serves a specific purpose for campaign management, the sheer number may be overwhelming. It is borderline but still reasonable given the broad domain coverage.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers CRUD for most resources (campaigns, sessions, mnemon types, guilds, friends, forum). Notable gaps: no delete_campaign or delete_session, and update_campaign is limited. However, the core workflows are well-covered.

Create campaign

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources