Civ6 MCP CN

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

plan_add

Add a Civilization VI plan step with a server-verified completion condition and optional prerequisite so steps auto-activate in sequence and progress is tracked objectively.

Instructions

Add a step to the plan chain. Steps auto-activate when their prerequisite completes — you don't need to remember what comes next; the briefing shows it every turn.

Completion is judged by SERVER-SIDE facts, not by your say-so:
    cond="cities_at_least"       args="2"        (city count reaches 2)
    cond="military_at_least"     args="3"        (military unit count)
    cond="camp_destroyed"        args="9,33"     (that camp confirmed gone)
    cond="exploration_at_least"  args="0.15"     (map revealed fraction)
    cond="tech_completed"        args="TECH_ARCHERY"
    cond="manual"                                (you mark it via plan_done)

Args:
    goal: Short Chinese description, e.g. "拆除营地(9,33)"
    cond: Completion condition type (see above)
    args: Condition argument
    after: Plan id that must complete first (-1 = starts active now)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`args`	No
`cond`	No	manual
`goal`	Yes
`after`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses auto-activation, server-side completion judgment, the supported condition types, and the manual precondition for plan_done. It does not discuss failure modes, invalid plan ids, or side effects beyond plan-chain mutation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded and structured with a behavior summary followed by an Args section. It is appropriately sized for a tool with several condition types, though a few phrases (e.g., briefing behavior) could be tighter.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a plan-creation tool with 4 parameters, the description covers the essential mechanics and parameter meanings; the main omission is how to discover existing plan ids for the 'after' parameter (e.g., via plan_list).

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: all four parameters are explained, including the Chinese goal format, cond values with examples, args semantics, and after semantics (-1 = starts active now). This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema titles and defaults.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource: 'Add a step to the plan chain.' It also explains the plan-chain model (auto-activation, prerequisites) and explicitly distinguishes manual completion via plan_done, so the agent can tell this apart from completion or listing tools.

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?

The description clearly implies when to use it: when creating a new step in a multi-step plan, with prerequisites handled by 'after'. It names plan_done for the manual case, but does not explicitly cover when to prefer plan_add over plan_list/plan_drop or when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server