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

RPG Maker MZ Authoring MCP

by NixonMSilva
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Search event commands

search_event_commands
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search map events, common events, and troop pages for blocks by text, block type, or database reference, returning each match's location and block ID for editing.

Instructions

Search all map events, common events and troop pages for blocks matching text, a block type and/or a reference (e.g. refKind "switch", refId 12). Results include locations and block ids.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_event_commands"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNo
limitNo
mapIdNo
refIdNo
eventIdNo
refKindNoswitch, variable, item, weapon, armor, actor, skill, state, common_event, map, troop, ...
blockTypeNoe.g. show_text, transfer_player, plugin_command, raw_command
includeTroopsNo
includeCommonEventsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that by disclosing the searchable domains (map events, common events, troop pages) and that results carry locations and block ids. It still omits default scoping, pagination/limit behavior, and result ordering.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the search domain comes first and the matching criteria and return info follow in a logical order. Slightly denser than ideal but every clause carries information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description usefully covers the return shape ('locations and block ids'), and it explains the reference filter. For a 9-parameter search tool it still leaves scoping and limit semantics unexplained, so an agent cannot fully predict behavior for the id- and limit-based parameters.

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 only 22%, so the description must compensate, and it does partially: the worked example pairing refKind "switch" with refId 12 clarifies how the reference filter composes, and the domain list hints at includeTroops/includeCommonEvents. However, limit, mapId, eventId and text-matching semantics remain undocumented anywhere.

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 ('Search') and a precise resource scope ('all map events, common events and troop pages' for 'blocks'), plus what constitutes a match (text, block type, reference). This is clearly distinct from retrieval siblings like get_event_page or describe_map_event, though no sibling is named to confirm the distinction.

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 matching criteria ('text, a block type and/or a reference') imply when to reach for this tool, but there is no explicit when-to-use framing and no exclusions or named alternatives (e.g. get_event_logic, describe_event_page) to route an agent away when a direct read is better. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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