Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Galgame MCP

Galgame MCP

by YeXuanHs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

vnt_proxy_sjis_ext_load

Loads sjis_ext.bin, a UTF-16LE mapping table, into the tunnel encoder to resolve extended Shift-JIS character conversion issues in Galgame localization.

Instructions

Load sjis_ext.bin (UTF-16LE mapping table) into the tunnel encoder.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "vnt_proxy_sjis_ext_load"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes
sync_utilNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects. It only says 'Load' but doesn't explain whether this is idempotent, overwrites existing mappings, or requires prior setup. The lack of behavioral detail is a concern for a mutation-like operation.

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 a single concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core action. However, its brevity sacrifices necessary context, making it efficient but somewhat under-specified.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and cryptic parameters, this tool requires more context. Missing information about the tunnel encoder, the file format, and expected usage makes the description incomplete for reliable invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'path' parameter beyond its existence or the meaning/effect of 'sync_util'. The boolean parameter's role is entirely unexplained, leaving the agent to guess.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Load') and the resource ('sjis_ext.bin' into the 'tunnel encoder'). It distinguishes from sibling encode/decode tools by being a load operation, but 'tunnel encoder' is undefined, leaving some ambiguity about the exact scope.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus the encode/decode or ext_save siblings. There are no prerequisites, contextual triggers, or exclusions mentioned.

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