character-forge-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Save a generation prompt

character_prompt_save

Saves a written generation prompt into a character's prompts folder as a kind-specific Markdown file, overwriting the previous prompt of that kind so each asset type keeps one current, reusable prompt.

Instructions

Saves one written generation prompt into the character's prompts/ folder as .md (overwrites the previous one of that kind).

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>",
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "sections": "<sections>"
    },
    "name": "character_prompt_save"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Character id.
`kind`	Yes	concept = T-pose sheet · illustration = key-art scene · voice = TTS voice design · video = Seedance-style clip · song = Suno · theme = instrumental leitmotif (ElevenLabs Music composition plan)
`sections`	Yes	Named sections, as listed in the brief.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the two most important traits: the write lands in a fixed prompts/ path with a deterministic <kind>.md filename, and it is destructive in that it 'overwrites the previous one of that kind'. It does not mention permissions, whether other kinds are untouched, or what the response contains.

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?

A single sentence with the action front-loaded and the two key facts (destination path/naming and overwrite behavior) packed into a parenthetical. Nothing is wasted or padded.

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 three-required-parameter save with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers destination and overwrite semantics but says nothing about validation failures, whether unlisted sections are discarded, or what a caller gets back. Adequate to invoke, thin for a mutation tool.

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 100% and the schema already explains id, the six enum kinds, and the label/text section structure, so the baseline applies. The description adds only the fact that kind determines the filename, which is marginally useful beyond the schema's own enum descriptions.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Saves one written generation prompt') plus the destination ('the character's prompts/ folder as <kind>.md'), which lets an agent distinguish it from read-oriented siblings such as character_prompt. It stops short of naming any sibling to contrast with, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative (e.g. character_prompt for reading). The parenthetical about overwriting is the only decision-relevant hint, and the agent must infer the rest from sibling names.

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