D&D 5e SRD Oracle

Discover Creation Holes

discover_creation_holes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a stored character draft to identify remaining fillable creation choices, current revision, and finalization status, so you know what is still needed before completion.

Instructions

Return the current supported fillable creation holes, draft revision, and finalization status for a stored character draft. Every returned choice option is admitted by this server's active execution support profile.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`draftId`	Yes	Character Draft id returned by create_character_draft.
`playSessionId`	Yes	Play Session handle returned by create_play_session for follow-up stateful calls in the same local process or authenticated account.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 21, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by noting that all returned options are admitted by the server's active execution support profile, and by revealing that draft revision and finalization status are included.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a meaningful constraint about the server's execution support profile without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

The tool has a rich output schema, full annotation coverage, and two fully described required parameters. The description is sufficient for an agent to invoke this read-only discovery tool correctly and understand what it returns.

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 both parameters are already well documented in the input schema. The description does not add additional parameter-level detail, so it relies appropriately on the structured schema definitions.

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 uses a specific verb ('Return') and names the exact resource ('current supported fillable creation holes, draft revision, and finalization status for a stored character draft'). It clearly contrasts with the sibling fill_creation_holes, which performs a mutation rather than discovery.

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 makes the usage context clear: call this to obtain the currently supported fillable options and draft status before proceeding. It does not explicitly name fill_creation_holes as the follow-up alternative, but the read-only discovery intent is unambiguous from the wording.

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