Skip to main content
Glama
Txpple

fvtt-mcp-molten5e

by Txpple
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

set-landing-scene

Set a persistent landing scene for each user so they log in where they belong, even while offline. Pass sceneIdentifier 'none' to clear assignments and return everyone to the active scene.

Instructions

Assign where a user LOGS IN — a per-user landing scene that persists, so a party split survives a refresh. Core Foundry has no such thing: every user lands on the one ACTIVE scene, and the User document has no scene field to change that (verified on v14.364). This writes a durable User FLAG that the house module fvtt-mod-openserver reads on ready and acts on with Scene#view() — so the module must be installed and enabled for it to do anything, and this tool WARNS when it is not, instead of reporting a working assignment. Unlike pull-users-to-scene, this works on OFFLINE users — that is the whole point. Sticky until cleared: pass sceneIdentifier "none" to put users back on the active scene. Reports who is assigned and who still follows the active scene. Needs NO scene ownership. GM-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sceneIdentifierYesScene id or exact name the users should LOG IN to. STRICT — no fuzzy matching. Pass "none" to CLEAR the assignment and put them back on the active scene with everyone else.
userIdentifiersYesUsers to assign — user ids or exact user names (e.g. ["Tom"]). Look them up with list-users, which also reports each user's current landingScene. Works on OFFLINE users (that is the point) — nobody has to be connected.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.1.3

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
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, and it excels: it reveals persistence across refresh, the durable flag mechanism, the module dependency and warning behavior, offline-user support, sticky-until-cleared semantics, and reporting behavior. It also notes no scene ownership is needed and that it is GM-only. Nothing is hidden.

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 front-loaded, opening with the core purpose before adding context about Foundry limitations, module dependency, and the sibling comparison. Every clause contributes useful information; it is not padded. It could be slightly trimmed without loss, but the structure and signal-to-noise ratio are strong.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is remarkably complete: it covers prerequisites, failure behavior, side effects, clearing semantics, offline operation, reporting, and access restrictions. It even identifies the relevant sibling tool and the module dependency. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema already covers both parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the durable flag effect, reinforces the special 'none' clearing behavior, and points to list-users to look up users and see their current landing scenes. This goes above the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 and resource: 'Assign where a user LOGS IN — a per-user landing scene.' It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool pull-users-to-scene by highlighting offline-user support, and it explains the Foundry limitation it addresses. An agent can confidently tell exactly what this tool does and why it exists.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('Unlike pull-users-to-scene, this works on OFFLINE users — that is the whole point'), its prerequisite (module fvtt-mod-openserver must be installed and enabled), how to clear assignments ('none'), and that it is GM-only. This is direct when/why guidance with a clear alternative.

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