UNO-MCP
🪄 UNO: Unified Narrative Operator
✨ 概要
UNO (Unified Narrative Operator) は、ありふれたストーリーコンテンツを豊かで詳細な物語へと変貌させる魔法のようなテキスト強化ツールです。高度な文学的技法とヒューリスティック分析を用いることで、UNOは元の声や意図を維持したまま、テキストの長さを2倍にすることができます。
UNOは、以下のような能力を持つあなたの個人的な物語アシスタントです:
📊 テキストを分析し、その強みと弱みを理解する
🌱 未発達なストーリー要素を成長させる
🎨 環境描写を豊かにする
⚡ アクションシーンを強化する
🌊 文章の流れとリズムを整える
🔄 繰り返し表現を排除する
Related MCP server: Clear Thought 1.5
🛠️ 機能
UNOは3つの強力なMCPツールを提供します:
1. 🔍 analyze_text
ストーリーページの詳細な分析を行い、以下を含む包括的なレポートを生成します:
📝 物語の構成位置の評価(序盤、中盤、クライマックス、結末)
👤 キャラクターの焦点の特定
🎭 シーンタイプの分類
🌡️ ムードとトーンの評価
📈 各技法に対する強化の推奨事項
🔄 繰り返しパターンの検出
2. ✨ enhance_text
5つの強化技法すべてを適用してテキストを変貌させます:
目標の長さ(デフォルト:200%)に合わせて自動的にテキストを拡張
テキストに最も必要なものに基づいて技法をインテリジェントに適用
テキスト全体で拡張のバランスを調整
3. ⚙️ custom_enhance_text
強化プロセスを完全に制御できます:
適用する強化技法を選択可能
カスタム拡張目標(100%-500%)を設定可能
物語の特定の側面に焦点を当てることが可能
🌟 強化技法
1. 👻 ゴールデンシャドウ強化
ストーリー内の未発達な要素を特定し、それらを拡張します:
言及されているが未発達なキャラクターを掘り下げる
暗示されているが説明されていないプロット要素を探求する
サブテキストや隠された意味を表面化させる
2. 🏞️ 環境拡張
没入感のある詳細を加えて設定を豊かにします:
鮮やかな感覚体験(視覚、聴覚、触覚、嗅覚)を追加
重要でないオブジェクトに記憶に残る焦点を当てる
雰囲気とムードを深める
3. ⚡ アクションシーン強化
アクションシーケンスをダイナミックで高強度の体験に変えます:
知覚時間を操作する(重要な瞬間をスローにする)
アクション中の感覚的な詳細を強める
爆発的なアクションと静寂の瞬間との間のリズムの交互作用を作り出す
環境をアクションの能動的な参加者にする
4. 🌊 文章の平滑化
文章の流れとリズムを改善します:
段落間の移行を強化する
読みやすさを向上させるために文の構造を変化させる
読者をテキストに引き込む自然なリズムを作り出す
5. 🔄 繰り返し表現の排除
スタイルを維持しながら、意図しない繰り返しを減らします:
繰り返される単語を特定し、意味のある代替語に置き換える
著者の声と意図を維持する
意図的な繰り返しと意図しない繰り返しを区別する
📋 インストール
Smithery経由でのインストール
Smithery を通じてClaude Desktop用のUnified Narrative Operatorを自動的にインストールするには:
npx -y @smithery/cli install @MushroomFleet/uno-mcp --client claude前提条件
Node.js (v14以上)
NPM (v6以上)
ステップバイステップのインストール
リポジトリをクローンまたはダウンロードする
git clone https://github.com/your-username/uno-mcp.git cd uno-mcp依存関係をインストールする
npm installTypeScriptファイルをビルドする
npm run buildサーバーを実行可能にする(Windowsではスキップ)
chmod +x dist/index.jsサーバーをテストする
node test-run.jsこれにより、サンプルストーリーでサーバーが実行され、3つのファイルが生成されます:
test-analysis.md: サンプル分析レポートtest-enhanced.txt: サンプル強化テキスト(200%)test-custom-enhanced.txt: サンプルカスタム強化(150%)
🔌 MCP統合
Claude Desktop統合
Claude設定ファイルを編集する
Windows:
C:\Users\[ユーザー名]\AppData\Roaming\Claude\claude_desktop_config.jsonmacOS:
~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
MCPサーバーセクションにUNOを追加する
{ "mcpServers": { "uno": { "command": "node", "args": ["/absolute/path/to/uno-mcp/dist/index.js"], "disabled": false, "autoApprove": [] } } }UNOのインストール先への絶対パスを使用するようにしてください。
Claudeを再起動する 設定を保存した後、Claudeを再起動してUNO MCPサーバーを有効にします。
VS Code統合
VS Code Claude拡張機能の設定を編集する
Windows:
c:\Users\[ユーザー名]\AppData\Roaming\Code\User\globalStorage\saoudrizwan.claude-dev\settings\cline_mcp_settings.jsonmacOS:
~/Library/Application Support/Code/User/globalStorage/saoudrizwan.claude-dev/settings/cline_mcp_settings.json
Claude Desktopと同様の設定を追加する
VS Codeを再起動またはウィンドウをリロードします。
🚀 使用例
ストーリーの分析
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>analyze_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "As Sarah walked into the garden, she noticed the old statue in the corner. It was covered in moss and vines, almost hidden from view. She felt drawn to it somehow."
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>これにより、物語の構成位置、キャラクターの焦点、強化の機会などに関する洞察を含む詳細な分析レポートが返されます。
ストーリーの強化(200%拡張)
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>enhance_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "As Sarah walked into the garden, she noticed the old statue in the corner. It was covered in moss and vines, almost hidden from view. She felt drawn to it somehow."
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>これにより、5つの強化技法すべてが適用され、元の長さの約2倍になったテキストバージョンが返されます。
カスタム強化
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>custom_enhance_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "As Sarah walked into the garden, she noticed the old statue in the corner. It was covered in moss and vines, almost hidden from view. She felt drawn to it somehow.",
"expansionTarget": 150,
"enableGoldenShadow": true,
"enableEnvironmental": true,
"enableActionScene": false,
"enableProseSmoother": true,
"enableRepetitionElimination": false
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>この例では、ゴールデンシャドウ強化、環境拡張、文章の平滑化のみを適用し、150%の拡張を目指します。
⚡ 統合のユースケース
📝 クリエイティブライティングアシスタント
Can you enhance this scene with more environmental details?
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>custom_enhance_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "Jack entered the abandoned warehouse, searching for clues.",
"expansionTarget": 300,
"enableEnvironmental": true,
"enableGoldenShadow": false,
"enableActionScene": false,
"enableProseSmoother": false,
"enableRepetitionElimination": false
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>📚 ライティングコーチ
Let me analyze this paragraph to give you feedback:
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>analyze_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "[student's writing sample]"
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>
Based on the analysis, I recommend focusing on developing your character motivations more clearly.🎮 ゲームの物語開発
Here's a more intense version of your action scene:
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>custom_enhance_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "[original action scene]",
"enableActionScene": true,
"enableEnvironmental": true,
"enableGoldenShadow": false,
"enableProseSmoother": true,
"enableRepetitionElimination": true
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>📔 小説の拡張
Let me help you expand this chapter:
<use_mcp_tool>
<server_name>uno</server_name>
<tool_name>enhance_text</tool_name>
<arguments>
{
"text": "[chapter excerpt]",
"expansionTarget": 180
}
</arguments>
</use_mcp_tool>💡 ヒントとコツ
🔍 テキストに何が必要かを理解するために、常に
analyze_textから始めてください🎯 微妙な強化には、低い拡張目標(120-150%)で
custom_enhance_textを使用してください🧩 長いテキストは小さなセクションに分割して処理し、その後結果を結合してください
🔄 長い作品を強化する際は、最後のステップとして「繰り返し表現の排除」を適用してください
⚡
enableActionScene: trueは、アクション要素を含むシーンにのみ使用してください
📄 ライセンス
ISC
🙏 謝辞
UNOは、高度な文学的強化技法と物語理論に基づいています。このプロジェクトにインスピレーションを与えてくれたストーリーテラー、作家、物語理論家の皆様に特別な感謝を捧げます。
⭐ UNOチームが愛を込めて作成 ⭐
参照
TranscriptionTools-MCP — 文字起こし処理
DeepLucid3D-MCP — 認知処理
UNO-MCP — 物語強化
gitea-mcp — Gitea統合
zero-vector-MCP — 手続き型生成
Available Tools
3 toolsanalyze_textC
Analyzes a story page and generates a report with insights
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | The story page text to analyze or enhance |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions analysis and report generation but lacks details on what 'insights' entail, whether the operation is read-only or has side effects, performance characteristics, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.
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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality ('Analyzes a story page') and adds the outcome ('generates a report with insights') without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's apparent complexity.
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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the 'report' or 'insights' look like, potential limitations, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a tool with no structured behavioral or output information, more context is needed to guide effective use.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'text' documented as 'The story page text to analyze or enhance'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the documentation adequately.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('analyzes') and resource ('a story page'), and specifies the output ('generates a report with insights'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'custom_enhance_text' or 'enhance_text', which appear to have related but potentially different functions.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings ('custom_enhance_text' and 'enhance_text'), nor does it mention any prerequisites, alternatives, or exclusions. It only states what the tool does without contextual usage information.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
custom_enhance_textC
Enhances a story page using selected techniques
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | The story page text to enhance | |
| expansionTarget | No | Target expansion percentage (default: 200) | |
| enableGoldenShadow | No | Enable Golden Shadow enhancement | |
| enableEnvironmental | No | Enable Environmental expansion | |
| enableActionScene | No | Enable Action Scene enhancement | |
| enableProseSmoother | No | Enable Prose Smoothing | |
| enableRepetitionElimination | No | Enable Repetition Elimination |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'enhances' text, implying a transformation, but doesn't describe the nature of the enhancement, potential side effects, rate limits, or output format. This is a significant gap for a tool with multiple parameters and no output schema.
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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('enhances a story page'). It avoids unnecessary words, but could be more informative given the tool's complexity, making it slightly under-specified rather than perfectly concise.
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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'enhance' entails, how techniques interact, or what the output looks like, leaving critical gaps for an agent to understand and use the tool effectively.
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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 7 parameters. The description mentions 'selected techniques' but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema, which already details each enhancement technique and parameter. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate coverage by the schema alone.
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 tool 'enhances a story page using selected techniques,' which provides a general purpose but lacks specificity. It mentions the resource ('story page') and verb ('enhances'), but doesn't clarify what 'enhance' means or how it differs from sibling tools like 'enhance_text' and 'analyze_text', leaving the purpose somewhat vague.
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?
The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'enhance_text' or 'analyze_text', nor does it specify prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions for usage, leaving the agent without clear direction on tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
enhance_textC
Enhances a story page using all techniques to meet expansion target
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | The story page text to enhance | |
| expansionTarget | No | Target expansion percentage (default: 200) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'using all techniques' but doesn't explain what these techniques are, whether the enhancement is reversible, what permissions or rate limits apply, or what the output looks like. For a tool with no annotations and an implied mutation ('enhances'), this leaves critical behavioral traits undisclosed.
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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action. It avoids unnecessary words and gets straight to the point. However, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from constraints, but overall it's appropriately concise for the tool's complexity.
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 the tool's implied complexity (enhancing text with multiple techniques) and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'enhance' entails, what techniques are used, or what the result looks like. For a tool that likely modifies content, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively.
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?
The schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters ('text' and 'expansionTarget'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as examples or contextual usage. However, since the schema adequately documents the parameters, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't detract from the schema's clarity.
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 tool 'enhances a story page using all techniques to meet expansion target', which provides a vague purpose. It specifies the resource ('story page') and goal ('meet expansion target'), but the verb 'enhances' is generic and doesn't clearly differentiate from sibling tools like 'analyze_text' or 'custom_enhance_text'. The description lacks specificity about what 'enhance' means operationally.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'analyze_text' or 'custom_enhance_text', nor does it specify contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions for usage. The agent must infer usage based on the tool name alone, which is insufficient for informed selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
3 tool updates
- First observed
analyze_text - First observed
custom_enhance_text - First observed
enhance_text
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
The tools 'custom_enhance_text' and 'enhance_text' have overlapping purposes, both focused on enhancing story pages, with only a vague distinction based on technique selection versus using all techniques. This creates ambiguity where an agent might struggle to choose between them for a given enhancement task. The 'analyze_text' tool is more distinct but the enhancement tools lack clear boundaries.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case naming pattern with a verb_noun structure (e.g., analyze_text, enhance_text). The naming is predictable and readable, with only minor deviation in 'custom_enhance_text' where the adjective 'custom' adds some variation but maintains the overall convention.
With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for a domain like story analysis and enhancement, potentially lacking coverage for broader operations. While it covers basic analyze and enhance functions, the low count may limit agent capabilities in handling more complex workflows or additional CRUD-like actions.
The tool set is severely incomplete for a story analysis and enhancement domain, as it only includes analysis and enhancement without any CRUD operations (e.g., create, update, delete story pages) or lifecycle management. This creates significant gaps that will likely cause agent failures when trying to perform full workflows beyond simple text processing.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Generate full stories, chapters, characters & cover art from a premise (planner-writer pipeline).
Fan out deep research across multiple AI providers, synthesize into one unified report.
Exactly 50 data transformation and live web verification tools for AI agents.
Make videos and docs with your AI agent — describe what you need, every output stays editable.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables iterative deep research by integrating AI agents with search engines, web scraping, and large language models for efficient data gathering and comprehensive reporting.4 npm323MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceProvides 30+ unified reasoning operations including systematic thinking, mental models, debugging approaches, statistical analysis, interactive notebooks, and advanced problem-solving frameworks for enhanced decision-making and complex reasoning tasks.96 npm53MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI-guided hierarchical fiction writing through structured XML documents. Supports step-by-step narrative expansion from book-level planning down to individual paragraphs, with custom Roo Code modes for collaborative story development.19MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceCombines structured sequential thinking with batch operation execution, enabling step-by-step reasoning with revision/branching capabilities and chained operations with variable piping between steps.151MIT