Skip to main content
Glama
Redseb
by Redseb

place_object

Place multi-tile objects such as houses or trees on a map, stamping them onto the upper tile layer and reporting passability, with warnings for collisions or impassable terrain.

Instructions

Place a multi-tile B/C object (a house, tree, fountain, …) on a map and report its passability. tiles is the object's block of flat tile ids as rows (top to bottom), each row left to right; a 0 leaves that cell untouched so L-shaped/irregular objects work. Stamped onto the upper tile layer (2) by default so it draws over the ground. Unlike paint_tiles this does NOT autotile (objects are flat sheet tiles) — instead it uses the tileset flags to warn when a footprint cell sits on impassable terrain or overwrites an existing tile, and returns the resulting per-cell passability plus the collision cells the object turns into a solid obstacle. Warn-by-default: never refuses a placement. Get tile ids from find_tile/get_tile_catalog.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYesLeft (top-left) tile x of where the object is placed
yYesTop (top-left) tile y of where the object is placed
layerNoZ-layer 0-3 to stamp onto (default 2 = upper tile layer, drawn over the ground)
mapIdYesThe ID of the map
tilesYesThe object as a rectangular grid of tile ids: rows top→bottom, each row left→right. 0 = a transparent cell (left untouched).
dryRunNoPreview only: return a diff of what would change without writing to disk.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals key traits: default stamping on layer 2, zero cells left untouched, warn-by-default with no refusal, use of tileset flags for warnings, and return of per-cell passability plus collision cells. This is exceptionally transparent.

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 description is dense but well-structured. It front-loads the main purpose and uses backticks and parentheticals to keep information tight. While longer than the TDQS 4.3 example, every sentence contributes critical detail without redundant fluff.

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 tool with no output schema, the description clearly states the return values (per-cell passability and collision cells) and warns about the non-autotiling behavior. It also references related tools for tile IDs. Minor gaps remain, such as not mentioning the dryRun parameter's behavior in the description (though the schema covers it), but overall it is complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

The schema already describes all parameters (100% coverage), but the description adds meaningful context: the `tiles` array orientation (rows top-to-bottom, left-to-right) and the meaning of 0 (transparent cell), plus the default layer value of 2. This goes beyond the schema descriptions and materially aids correct invocation.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Place a multi-tile B/C object... on a map and report its passability.' It includes concrete examples (house, tree, fountain) and explicitly differentiates from the sibling tool paint_tiles by stating it does NOT autotile.

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?

The description explicitly contrasts with paint_tiles ('Unlike paint_tiles this does NOT autotile'), providing clear context for choosing this tool. It also tells the user to get tile IDs from find_tile/get_tile_catalog. However, it does not enumerate specific scenarios where other alternatives (e.g., fill_area, object_tiles) would be preferable.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Redseb/rpgmaker-mz-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server