Skip to main content
Glama
siweina

dsh-novel-writer

by siweina
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

novel_plot

Track and manage foreshadowing and plot threads across chapters: register, update, mark as recovered, scan for mentions, and view cross-chapter structure.

Instructions

伏笔/剧情线登记表：维护某部作品的伏笔与剧情钩子（open 待回收 / done 已回收）。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNo伏笔 id（update/done/delete 时需要）。
bookYes书名。
noteNo可选：备注（如何回收/何时回收）。
rootNo章节库根目录。
typeNo可选：伏笔类型（add/update）。
actionNolist=查看；add=登记新伏笔；update=修改；done=标记已回收；delete=删除；scan=扫描章节文本，自动更新伏笔提及章节；graph=跨章结构视图（伏笔埋设跨度 / 人物连续缺席 / 剧情线活跃度 / 时间线顺序 / 大纲对比），只读不写盘。
chapterNo可选：伏笔出现的章节。
contentNoadd/update 时：伏笔内容描述。
priorityNo可选：优先级（add/update）。
locationsNo可选：关联地点（add/update）。
payoffConditionNo可选：回收条件（add/update）。
absenceThresholdNograph 时可选：人物连续缺席多少章算异常（默认 5）。
relatedCharactersNo可选：关联人物（add/update）。

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv5.0.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / absenceThreshold
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "graph 时可选：人物连续缺席多少章算异常（默认 5）。",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / description
      Previous value: -"list=查看；add=登记新伏笔；update=修改；done=标记已回收；delete=删除；scan=扫描章节文本，自动更新伏笔提及章节。"New value: +"list=查看；add=登记新伏笔；update=修改；done=标记已回收；delete=删除；scan=扫描章节文本，自动更新伏笔提及章节；graph=跨章结构视图（伏笔埋设跨度 / 人物连续缺席 / 剧情线活跃度 / 时间线顺序 / 大纲对比），只读不写盘。"
    • changedInput schema / properties / action / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "list",
-  "add",
-  "update",
-  "done",
-  "delete",
-  "scan"
-]New value: +[
+  "list",
+  "add",
+  "update",
+  "done",
+  "delete",
+  "scan",
+  "graph"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. '维护' hints at mutation, and the open/done statuses imply state changes, but the description does not disclose that add/update/done/delete persist changes, what data may be modified, or that graph is read-only. It does not contradict any annotation because none exist, but it leaves major behavioral traits unexplained.

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?

The description is one clean sentence with no filler, and it front-loads the core resource type. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices behavioral context that would matter for a 13-parameter tool, so it is concise but slightly under-specified.

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?

For a tool with 13 parameters, multiple action modes, and no output schema, this description is too thin. It does not explain the action lifecycle, when to use scan versus graph versus add/update/done/delete, or what a call returns. The schema covers parameter mechanics, but the description alone does not give an agent enough context to invoke the tool correctly in a real workflow.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even without parameter details in the description. The description adds only the open/done status vocabulary and does not meaningfully clarify any of the 13 parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description identifies the resource (伏笔/剧情线登记表, a foreshadowing/plot-line registry) and the action (维护, maintain), and adds the open/done status model. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like novel_style_check, novel_continuity_check, and novel_outline, though it does not explicitly name an operation like list/add/update.

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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what the registry is, not when an agent should choose it over related tools like novel_outline or novel_semantic_search. The use cases are implied by the name and action schema but not stated.

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