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

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

delete event page

delete_event_page
Destructive

Deletes one event page from an RPG Maker MZ map event as a preview; later pages shift down, and applying requires apply_changes with confirm.

Instructions

DESTRUCTIVE: delete one page (later pages shift down). Preview-only; apply with apply_changes + confirm.

Preview-first: returns a change set (semantic + native diff, validation). Destructive: apply only via apply_changes with confirm.

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": {
      "mapId": "<mapId>",
      "eventId": "<eventId>",
      "pageIndex": "<pageIndex>"
    },
    "name": "delete_event_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
applyNoCommit right after a successful preview (non-destructive operations only; needs --allow-write; warnings also need acknowledgeWarnings). Default false = preview only.
mapIdYesMap ID (from list_maps)
eventIdYesMap event ID
pageIndexYesZERO-based page index (Page 1 in the editor = pageIndex 0)
allowScriptNotrue ONLY if the user explicitly asked to insert JavaScript (script commands, script conditions/operands, route scripts).
descriptionNoOptional description stored in the transaction log
acknowledgeWarningsNoAccept validation warnings when apply=true. Review them with the user first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, yet the description adds real value: the call returns a change set (semantic + native diff, validation) rather than mutating, pages after the target shift index, and the write only happens through apply_changes with confirm. That is exactly the consequence-of-calling information an agent needs for a destructive preview tool.

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 destructive warning is front-loaded and the sentences are short. The two paragraphs partially restate the same preview/apply rule ("Preview-only; apply with apply_changes + confirm" and "apply only via apply_changes with confirm"), which is mild redundancy but not confusing.

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?

For a 7-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the return shape (change set with diffs and validation), the index-shift side effect, and the required commit path. Nothing essential for a correct invocation is missing.

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 100% and every parameter (mapId, eventId, pageIndex zero-based, apply, allowScript, acknowledgeWarnings) is documented in-schema, so the baseline applies. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, not even a restatement of the zero-based pageIndex gotcha or the apply flag.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("delete one page") and pins the scope with "(later pages shift down)", so an agent can distinguish it from deleting a whole event or reordering pages. It stops short of naming a specific sibling alternative, which keeps it out of the 5 tier.

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?

Explicitly frames this as preview-only and names the follow-up path: apply via apply_changes with confirm. The when-not-to-do-it-here case is therefore clear. There is no guidance on when deletion is appropriate versus reordering/other page operations, and no prerequisite/permission notes.

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