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

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

delete map event

delete_map_event
Destructive

Deletes a map event and nulls its slot while preserving other event IDs. Preview-only by default; commit through apply_changes with confirmation.

Instructions

DESTRUCTIVE: delete a map event (its slot becomes null; other event IDs never change). Always 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>"
    },
    "name": "delete_map_event"
  }
}

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
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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's job is to add context, which it does: preview-first behavior, null slot semantics, stable IDs, and the contents of the returned change set (semantic + native diff, validation). It does not mention write-permission gating or warning acknowledgement, but the schema covers those for the apply path.

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 DESTRUCTIVE warning and slot/ID semantics are front-loaded, which is good, but the preview-only/apply-with-confirm guidance is stated twice in near-identical form. The repetition costs a sentence that could have carried new information.

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 rich annotations and full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the critical facts: reversibility implications, preview/apply split, and the shape of the preview result. Only minor gaps remain (permission requirements, warning acknowledgement interplay) that the schema partially covers.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented in the schema, including apply and acknowledgeWarnings. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond linking apply to apply_changes, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource ('delete a map event') and immediately clarifies the semantics of the operation: the slot becomes null while other event IDs never change. That distinguishes it from page-level or record-level deletion siblings without requiring the schema to be opened.

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 routes the apply step to the sibling 'apply_changes' with confirm, and states the tool itself is always preview-only. It does not address when to choose this over sibling deletion tools such as delete_event_page, but the primary alternative for committing changes is named with its condition.

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