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

RPG Maker MV MCP Server

by Xerolo44
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Update System.json

update_system

Shallow-merge top-level fields such as gameTitle, startMapId, startX, startY, switches, and variables into System.json to configure RPG Maker MV system settings.

Instructions

Shallow-merge the given top-level fields into System.json (e.g. gameTitle, startMapId, startX, startY, switches, variables).

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": {
      "data": "<data>"
    },
    "name": "update_system"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesTop-level System.json fields to set

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.5.1

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the merge is shallow and limited to top-level fields, but says nothing about permissions, reversibility, validation, whether the file must already exist, or what happens on invalid fields.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The key operation and examples are delivered immediately.

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?

For a one-parameter update tool, the description is minimally adequate: it explains the merge behavior and gives examples. However, because there are no annotations or output schema and this is a mutation, it should disclose more about safety, validation, and merge edge cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single data parameter is already documented as 'Top-level System.json fields to set.' The description adds useful examples and the shallow-merge semantics, but does not fully enumerate or constrain valid fields.

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 states a specific verb and resource: shallow-merge top-level fields into System.json. It also gives concrete example fields, making the operation distinguishable from read-oriented siblings such as get_system and from unrelated update tools.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

It implies the tool is used to update System.json, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no comparison to alternatives such as get_system or the dedicated set_* tools. An agent must infer the selection conditions.

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