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

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Render map image

render_map
Read-onlyIdempotent

Renders a PNG of an RPG Maker MZ map with tile layers, events, grid labels, and optional passability or reachable overlays so you can inspect layout and place events accurately.

Instructions

PNG image of a map (or a region) as the game draws it: tile layers with real autotiles, shadows, event sprites, plus a coordinate grid with x/y axis labels, event id boxes (colored by trigger), the player start (S) and transfer arrivals (T). Overlays: passability (blocked cells + walls), reachable (from the player start, a transfer arrival or reachableFrom), regions. Use it to understand the layout before placing events; use get_map_passability for exact walkability.

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>"
    },
    "name": "render_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gridNoCell grid and axis labels (default true)
mapIdYes
scaleNoPixels per tile = tileSize x scale. Default: fit the longest side in about 1024 px
assumeNoGame state used to pick each event's active page. Default: all switches/self switches OFF, variables 0, no items.
eventsNosprites (default) = character graphics + id boxes, markers = id boxes only
regionNoMap cells to cover (default: whole map)
overlayNo
ignoreEventsNoIgnore events (tiles only). Default false: blocking events count as obstacles.
reachableFromNoOrigin for overlay=reachable (default: player start or first transfer arrival)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's job is to add rendering behavior, which it does: it discloses that overlays exist, that the reachable overlay originates from the player start, a transfer arrival, or reachableFrom, and that event pages are resolved against a default all-off game state when 'assume' is omitted. It stops short of covering output size limits or performance for large maps, which is a minor gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the artifact and its contents, and every clause maps to a rendering feature an agent would want to predict. The second sentence is dense (overlay modes, reachable origin, usage routing) but nothing is redundant; a light restructure into short bullets would make it marginally easier to scan.

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?

With nine parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting by describing the returned image in detail — effectively serving as the output contract. Defaults for scale, region, events, grid, and assume are either stated or in the schema, leaving only edge behavior on very large maps unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 78%, so the schema carries most parameter documentation; the description still adds meaning by explaining what the overlay modes produce visually (blocked cells + walls, reachability origin, regions) and by tying grid, event markers, and the start/arrival symbols to rendered output. The 'assume' parameter's purpose is essentially left to the schema, which is the one area it does not enrich.

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 concrete verb and output artifact ('PNG image of a map') and then enumerates exactly what is drawn: tile layers with autotiles, shadows, event sprites, grid with axis labels, id boxes, player start (S), transfer arrivals (T). That level of specificity makes it unmistakable against siblings like get_map_summary or get_map_passability, which return data rather than an image.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit use case ('understand the layout before placing events') and names the alternative plus the condition that selects it ('use get_map_passability for exact walkability'). It also constrains what the tool is not for by pointing to a dedicated passability tool, so the agent does not have to guess.

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