Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wyt-mcp

wyt-mcp

by MLMecham
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

give_artifact

End the game by giving the artifact to the waiting recipient. Requires explicit player choice to trigger the conclusion.

Instructions

At the reveal: place it in his waiting hand. He has waited a very long time for exactly this. Requires the player's explicit, unmistakable choice — never infer it from an ambiguous line; if unsure, ask, in the fiction. This ends the game.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "give_artifact"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the behavioral traits: that this action ends the game, requires explicit player choice, and is a final action. This is beyond what structured fields would provide.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is somewhat poetic with 'He has waited a very long time for exactly this', which adds atmosphere but not essential information. It is still relatively concise at four sentences, but could be more direct.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and the game context, the description is complete. It explains the trigger, required player input, and consequence (ends game). No additional information is needed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter info. Schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds meaning about the tool's purpose without parameter details, which is adequate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the action 'place it in his waiting hand' which implies giving an artifact, and mentions it ends the game. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'claim_artifact' and 'give_item' by indicating this is a final, specific action at the reveal.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use ('at the reveal'), how to use ('requires explicit, unmistakable choice'), and what happens ('ends the game'). Also advises against inferring from ambiguity and to ask if unsure.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools