mcp-server-return-to-dark-tower

by ChessMess

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Play Light Sequence

tower_light_sequence

Play a light sequence on the board game tower by specifying a sequence ID (1-19), with an optional sound effect.

Instructions

Play a predefined light sequence by ID (1-19). Optionally play a sound simultaneously.

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": {
      "sequence": "<sequence>"
    },
    "name": "tower_light_sequence"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sequence`	Yes	Light sequence ID from TOWER_LIGHT_SEQUENCES
`soundIndex`	No	Optional sound to play with sequence

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Without annotations, description carries burden. It states sequence playback and optional sound but omits details on error handling, state changes, or feedback. Adequate for a simple command.

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?

Single sentence front-loads action and parameters. No redundant words, efficient and clear.

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?

No output schema, but tool is simple. Description covers what the tool does; return values not critical for a play action.

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% with field descriptions. Description adds context about ID range and optional sound, but doesn't go beyond schema. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Play' and resource 'predefined light sequence', with ID range 1-19, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like tower_light_sequence_by_name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tower_light_sequence_by_name, tower_play_sound). Lacks when-not-to-use context.

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