Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
RPG Maker MV MCP Server

RPG Maker MV MCP Server

by Xerolo44
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Create map event

create_event

Add a new event to a map at specified coordinates. Optionally provide custom event pages; returns the new event ID.

Instructions

Add a new event to a map at (x, y). If no pages are given, a single empty page (action-button trigger, no commands) is created. Returns the new event id.

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": "<name>",
      "x": "<x>",
      "y": "<y>"
    },
    "name": "create_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
xYes
yYes
nameYes
noteNo
mapIdYes
pagesNoOptional event pages; defaults to one empty page

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: the return of the new event id and the default empty page creation. This is adequate for a creation tool, though more detail on persistence or side effects could improve it.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two sentences, immediately stating the core action and the critical default behavior. No unnecessary information.

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?

Given no output schema and low schema coverage, the description covers the essential aspects: function, default page behavior, and return value. It is fairly complete for a simple creation tool, though it could elaborate on other 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 low (17%), but the description adds meaningful context for the 'pages' parameter by explaining default behavior. Other parameters like x, y, name, note, and mapId remain unexplained, leaving gaps.

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 clearly states the verb 'Add' and the resource 'event to a map at (x, y)', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also naturally distinguishes from siblings like 'update_event' and 'add_event_command'.

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 provides explicit guidance on the page parameter behavior, helping the agent understand default behavior. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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