update_npc_mnemonsUpdate typed/meta fields of NPC mnemons (visibility, tags, npcType, faction membership, etc.). Does NOT modify content blocks — use update_mnemons_content for that. Set visibility=PUBLIC on multiple NPCs in a single call by listing them in items[].
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | ||
| campaignId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and the description adds that it does not modify content blocks, which is a key behavioral nuance not in annotations. It doesn't contradict annotations, and the added context is useful, though it could mention partial update semantics more explicitly.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then an exclusion, then a practical tip. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's moderate complexity and sibling context, the description is complete. It covers scope, limitations, and a multi-item usage scenario. Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. It's sufficiently informative for an agent to select and invoke correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is low, but the description compensates by explaining that items[] enables multi-NPC updates and that visibility can be set to PUBLIC. It also lists examples of editable fields (visibility, tags, npcType, faction membership). However, not all parameters like sheetId or relationshipIds are explained, and the schema has minimal descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states 'Update typed/meta fields of NPC mnemons' with specific fields listed, and explicitly distinguishes itself from update_mnemons_content. The verb 'update' plus resource 'NPC mnemons' and scope makes it unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly says when to use (typed/meta fields) and when not to (content blocks, use update_mnemons_content instead). It also provides a concrete usage example (set visibility=PUBLIC on multiple NPCs via items[]), giving clear actionable guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
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.
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.
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.
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.