Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wyt-mcp

wyt-mcp

by MLMecham
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

talk_to

Generate dialogue for an NPC using its personality, disposition, and memories. Applies status candidates to guide the interaction.

Instructions

The NPC packet: personality, sanity tier, disposition, gates, the memories that matter, and 2-3 status candidates you may apply. You improvise the dialogue FROM this — never against it.

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": {
      "npc_key": "<npc_key>"
    },
    "name": "talk_to"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
npc_keyYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description explains the output (NPC packet) and the intended behavior (improvise dialogue from it). It does not mention side effects or permissions, but for a read-like tool this is acceptable.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the key output. However, the first sentence is dense and could be clearer for the parameter.

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?

For a dialogue tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and how to use the output. It lacks input parameter explanation but is otherwise sufficient.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The description does not explain the 'npc_key' parameter at all, leaving the AI to guess its meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for this gap.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: it provides an NPC packet (personality, sanity, etc.) for improvising dialogue. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'attack' or 'buy' which have different actions.

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 instructs the AI to improvise dialogue FROM the packet and never against it, providing clear usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives.

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