entry-offline-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

entry_data

Manage Entry project variables, lists, and messages by adding, setting, renaming, or deleting them and configuring initial values, visibility, positions, scope, list items, and dimensions.

Instructions

변수/리스트/신호 관리. kind='variable'|'list'|'message'. action='add'|'set'|'rename'|'delete'. variable: value(초기값), visible(무대에 표시), x,y(표시 위치), scope('global' 또는 오브젝트 이름=그 오브젝트 전용 지역변수). list: items(초기 항목 배열), visible, x, y, width, height. message: name만. 파이썬 코드로 스크립트를 넣으면 쓰인 변수/리스트/신호는 자동 생성되지만, 초기값·표시여부·위치는 여기서 정하세요.

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "action": "<action>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "entry_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`x`	No
`y`	No
`kind`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`items`	No
`scope`	No
`value`	No
`width`	No
`action`	Yes
`height`	No
`visible`	No
`new_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one important trait, that script-embedded variables are auto-generated and this tool configures them, but says nothing about whether delete is destructive, what happens to blocks referencing a deleted variable, or whether set/rename have side effects on existing usage.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: the kind/action line comes first, followed by per-kind field breakdowns and a closing usage note. The terse notation is efficient, though the abrupt shorthand demands some parsing effort.

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 12-parameter mutation tool with both delete and rename and no annotations or output schema, the description is reasonably complete on field semantics but thin on consequences. An agent still has to guess that rename consumes new_name rather than name, and what deletion does to dependent blocks.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage across 12 parameters, the description is doing most of the work: it defines value, visible, x, y, scope (including the global vs object-local semantics, which the schema does not), items, width, height, and that message takes name only. The remaining gaps are new_name (inferable only from the rename action) and the enum meanings, which the schema already carries.

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 concrete resource set (variables, lists, messages) plus the discriminators (kind and action) that define what the tool operates on. It is clearly distinct from the entry_* siblings, which deal with objects, scripts and project state, though it does not explicitly say so.

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?

Explains the kind/action matrix and settles a real decision point: variables used inside Python scripts are auto-created, so this tool is for setting initial value, visibility and position. That is genuine when-to-use context. It stops short of stating when not to use it or what rename/delete require, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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