Create a new map in a Kanka campaign using the campaign ID and map data. This tool adds a map to your worldbuilding API, enabling direct map creation from your MCP client.
Create a new map
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | ||
| campaignId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden, but 'Create a new map' only states the action. It does not mention side effects, permissions, failure modes, reversibility, or what happens on duplicate creation.
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?
The description is very short and contains no wasted words, making it concise. However, it is under-specified for a tool with a required nested object parameter and would benefit from more structure and detail.
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 two required parameters including a nested object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely inadequate. It fails to explain what 'data' should contain, why campaignId is needed, or what the operation returns, making it nearly impossible for an agent to 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 0% and the description does not mention either 'campaignId' or 'data' at all. The unstructured 'data' object is completely unexplained, so an agent has no idea what content to supply.
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 states the specific action 'create' on the 'map' resource, which clearly separates it from get_map, update_map, delete_map, and list_maps. However, it lacks any scope or distinguishing detail beyond the resource name, so it doesn't fully clarify what a map is in this context.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus any of the many sibling create_* tools, and no prerequisites such as an existing campaign are mentioned. The description offers no alternatives, exclusions, or contextual hints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.