Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
DX12 Engine MCP Server

DX12 Engine MCP Server

by ryuto-alt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

リネーム

dx12_rename_entity
Idempotent

Renames an entity in the DX12 Engine editor. If the new name is a duplicate, automatically appends a number to make it unique.

Instructions

エンティティ名を変更する。重複名は連番(name_2 など)が付与され、確定した {name} を返す。

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": {
      "entity": "<entity>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "dx12_rename_entity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes新しい名前。
entityYesエンティティ id(int)。dx12_list_entities / dx12_find_entity で取得。

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultNoエンジンからの生の結果。実際の形は各ツールの説明 / dx12_describe_components を参照。text にも同内容を JSON 文字列で格納。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains that duplicate names are automatically handled with sequential numbering and that the tool returns the final name. The idempotentHint annotation is present, but the description's behavior could potentially conflict with idempotency if the generated name changes on repeat calls; however, no explicit contradiction is stated. The description does not address side effects or permissions.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose, then adds crucial detail about duplicate handling and return value. Every part is necessary and there is no wasteful text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no enums, output schema exists), the description covers the essential behaviors: renaming, duplicate handling, and return of confirmed name. It does not cover validation rules (e.g., name character limits) or edge cases, but it is sufficiently complete for typical use.

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?

The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the auto-numbering behavior for the name parameter and that the return value is the confirmed name. The schema itself provides descriptive parameter descriptions, but the tool's unique behavior (duplicate handling) is fully described, enriching the parameter semantics.

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 the tool's purpose: changing entity names. It explains the auto-numbering for duplicates and that it returns the confirmed name. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, delete, or duplicate entities, making the tool's role 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 description implies when to use the tool (to rename an entity) but does not explicitly state prerequisites, conditions, or when not to use it. It only mentions that the entity ID can be obtained from specific other tools, which is helpful but insufficient for full usage guidance. No alternatives are discussed.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools