RPG Maker MZ MCP Server

by devmagary

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

update_actor

Update an RPG Maker MZ actor's properties including name, class, level, and appearance.

Instructions

Update an existing actor's properties

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_actor"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Actor ID to update
`name`	No
`nickname`	No
`classId`	No
`initialLevel`	No
`maxLevel`	No
`profile`	No
`characterName`	No
`faceName`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 31, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided. The description merely says 'Update,' which implies modification, but lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., whether partial updates are allowed, what happens to missing fields, or if the operation is irreversible).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it is too brief to be informative. It does not front-load critical details about the tool's functionality.

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 output schema and only a minimal description, the tool lacks completeness. For a 9-parameter update tool, the description should provide context on update behavior, parameter constraints, or expected outcomes.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 11% (only the 'id' parameter has a description). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain the purpose of the other 8 parameters.

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 'Update an existing actor's properties,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_actor and get_actors by implying modification of an existing entity.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_actor for new actors). The description does not specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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