Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Apply change set

apply_changes
Destructive

Commit a previewed change set safely: re-checks file revisions, rejects stale previews, backs up originals, writes atomically, and rolls back on failure. Requires write permission.

Instructions

Commit a previously previewed change set. Re-checks file revisions (rejects stale previews), backs up originals, writes atomically, and rolls back on failure. Requires --allow-write.

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": {
      "changeSetId": "<changeSetId>"
    },
    "name": "apply_changes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoFor destructive change sets: repeat the changeSetId to confirm
changeSetIdYes
acknowledgeWarningsNoRequired when the change set has warnings

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the revision re-check, stale-preview rejection, backup of originals, atomic write, and rollback-on-failure semantics, plus the --allow-write gate. The destructiveHint=true annotation is consistent with this. It does not say what is returned on success or how partial failures are reported, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the safety guarantees and the prerequisite flag. No filler or repetition.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the safety profile, atomicity, rollback, and the write-permission prerequisite. The main remaining gap is the success/return behavior, which matters slightly more because no output schema exists.

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 67%, with confirm and acknowledgeWarnings already documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning for changeSetId beyond implying it identifies the previewed set, and does not explain when confirm or acknowledgeWarnings must be supplied. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does most of the work.

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?

States a specific verb ('Commit') and resource ('a previously previewed change set'), and the word 'previously previewed' implicitly separates it from preview_changes and get_change_set. An agent can tell this is the commit step of a preview/apply workflow.

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?

Makes the precondition explicit: the change set must have been previewed first, and the operation requires --allow-write. It does not name the sibling preview tool or state when to use discard_changes instead, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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