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

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Discard change set

discard_changes
Read-only

Discard a pending change set to cancel proposed RPG Maker MZ edits without modifying files on disk.

Instructions

Drop a pending change set (nothing on disk is touched).

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": "discard_changes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
changeSetIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description proactively explains why that is true — "nothing on disk is touched" — clarifying that "drop" affects only in-memory pending state rather than persisted data. That is genuine added context, though it doesn't say whether the discarded set is recoverable or what errors occur for an invalid ID.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource stated first and the safety caveat parenthetically attached. No wasted wording.

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 one-parameter discard operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential question an agent would ask — does this delete anything real? Remaining gaps (error behavior, post-condition state) are minor for this complexity.

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 0% for the single required parameter, so the schema provides only the name changeSetId. The description's reference to a "change set" loosely ties to that parameter but adds no format, sourcing, or validation detail.

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?

Uses a specific verb ("drop") with a specific resource ("a pending change set"), which cleanly separates it from apply_changes or preview_changes siblings. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative, but the scope is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase "pending change set" implies the situation (an unapplied change set exists and you want to abandon it), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instruction, nor a named alternative such as apply_changes.

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