Syncretica MCP Server

populate_myths_bulk

Triggers bulk myth discovery across all deities or one deity, with an optional synchronous wait. Use it to populate mythological datasets at scale.

Instructions

Trigger bulk myth discovery across all deities or a single deity.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "populate_myths_bulk"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sync`	No	If true, wait synchronously for completion
`god_id`	No	Optional deity ID to scope discovery

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Trigger' hints at an asynchronous job, but nothing states whether this returns a job ID, writes new myth records, is idempotent, or what the side effects and cost of a bulk run are — all critical for an unannotated bulk mutation.

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?

One short sentence with the scope information front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is part of why behavioral and usage context are missing.

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?

This is an unannotated bulk trigger with no output schema, so the description is the only place async behavior, return shape, and side effects could be described — and it covers none of them. It is under-specified for a tool that kicks off large-scale writes.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, and the baseline is 3. The description adds only a small amount of meaning by clarifying that omitting the deity scope means 'all deities'; it says nothing about the sync flag, which the schema already explains.

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 ('bulk myth discovery') plus the scope variants (all deities vs one deity), which lets an agent distinguish it from the singular sibling populate_god_myth. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, but the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'across all deities or a single deity' implies the two usage modes, so an agent can infer when to omit god_id. However, it never says when to prefer this over populate_god_myth or populate_gods_bulk, and gives no prerequisites or warnings about repeated runs.

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