de en es ja ko ru zh

Bling-bag

Name: Bling-bag
Author: tjclaude88

by tjclaude88

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Local

Bling Bag

给你的机器人一个身份。

你的机器人有名字了。现在给它一个个性、外观和背景故事吧。

转动转盘看看你会得到什么——或者在 bling.json 文件中编写你自己的内容。

npm version Glama

你将获得什么

五个 MCP 工具和两个身份池：

WOW — 怪异办公室员工 (Weird Office Workers)

随机生成一个古怪的办公室机器人：名字、职位、办公桌设置、习惯、咖啡仪式以及一张可直接截图的分享卡片。99/99 测试通过，完整的稀有度引擎，13 个加权特征池。

Legends — 历史人物

同样的引擎，不同的宇宙。生成一个处于荒谬企业角色中的历史人物——尤利乌斯·凯撒作为恶意收购专家，玛丽·居里作为实验室安全通缉犯，拿破仑作为区域经理（法国及周边地区）。

将 variant: "legends" 传递给 roll_identity 即可使用。默认为 "wow"。

Related MCP server: being-mcp-server

安装

先决条件

Node.js 20 或更高版本
一个兼容 MCP 的客户端（Claude Code、Claude Desktop、Codex、Cursor 等）

添加包

npm install bling-bag

或者无需安装即可按需运行——MCP 客户端可以通过 npx bling-bag 直接启动它（见下文客户端配置）。

用于开发（修改源代码）

git clone https://github.com/tjclaude88/mcp-bling.git
cd mcp-bling
npm install
npm run build

在 dist/index.js 生成一个可运行的服务器。

将其连接到你的 MCP 客户端

该服务器使用 stdio 传输——客户端将其作为子进程启动，而不是通过网络端口。

Claude Code

添加到你的 Claude Code MCP 配置中（位置因版本而异）：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bling": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "bling-bag"],
      "env": {
        "BLING_PATH": "/absolute/path/to/your/bling.json"
      }
    }
  }
}

npx -y bling-bag 会下载并运行最新版本，无需单独的安装步骤。

Claude Desktop

同样的格式，在 claude_desktop_config.json 中：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "bling": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "bling-bag"],
      "env": {
        "BLING_PATH": "/absolute/path/to/your/bling.json"
      }
    }
  }
}

固定版本（生产环境推荐）

为了避免自动获取未来的版本，请固定特定版本：

"args": ["-y", "bling-bag@0.1.0"]

开发模式调用（从本地克隆）

如果你已经克隆了仓库并想直接从 dist/ 运行，请使用：

"command": "node",
"args": ["/absolute/path/to/mcp-bling/dist/index.js"]

如果未设置 BLING_PATH，服务器会在其工作目录中查找 ./bling.json。

配置解析顺序

服务器按以下顺序解析 bling 配置路径：

--bling <path> CLI 参数（最高优先级）
BLING_PATH 环境变量
服务器工作目录中的 ./bling.json（默认）

`bling.json` — 机器人的身份文件

需要三个字段：name、personality（包含 tone、formality、humor）和 theme（包含作为 #RRGGBB 十六进制字符串的 primary_color 和 accent_color）。

最小示例

{
  "name": "Pixel",
  "personality": {
    "tone": "warm",
    "formality": "casual",
    "humor": "playful"
  },
  "theme": {
    "primary_color": "#3A7BD5",
    "accent_color": "#FFD166"
  }
}

完整示例（包含所有可选部分）

{
  "name": "Brenda from Accounts",
  "personality": {
    "tone": "polite",
    "formality": "professional",
    "humor": "dry",
    "catchphrase": "Per my last email"
  },
  "physical": {
    "species": "human",
    "height": "permanently mid-sigh",
    "accessory": "a lanyard with 14 badges of varying importance",
    "expression": "polite disappointment",
    "material": "a cardigan, at least one"
  },
  "office": {
    "job_title": "ASCII Comptroller",
    "desk_setup": "a coffee mug labelled WORLD'S OKAYEST DBA",
    "habit": "microwaves fish despite three separate HR warnings",
    "coffee_ritual": "black coffee, no nonsense",
    "meeting_energy": "always 4 minutes late, always with a reason",
    "passive_aggressive": "Per my last email"
  },
  "theme": {
    "primary_color": "#9C6B3A",
    "accent_color": "#D9D9D9"
  },
  "homunculus": {
    "subject_id": "0147",
    "cohort": "Tuesday",
    "classification": "Middle Manager",
    "ingested": "2025-07-14",
    "flag": "flagged for review"
  }
}

验证规则

name — 非空字符串
personality.tone, personality.formality, personality.humor — 非空字符串
theme.primary_color, theme.accent_color — 必须匹配 ^#[0-9A-Fa-f]{6}$（无简写 #RGB，无缺失 #）

验证错误将作为 isError: true 返回，并带有结构化的 { error: "..." } 主体，指出缺失或格式错误的字段——代理可以自我纠正。

典型的代理流程

流程 A — 采用已配置的身份

1. Call get_identity → receive name, personality, appearance, theme
2. Call get_theme_for_platform with platform="terminal" (or web/slack/discord/ide)
3. Use the returned styling in agent output (ANSI codes for headings, etc.)

流程 B — 生成全新的随机身份

1. Call roll_identity → receive identity + rarity + framed share card
2. (Optional) Call get_rarity_report → receive just the framed share card again
3. Call save_last_roll → persists the rolled identity to bling.json (with .bak backup of any prior config)
4. Future calls to get_identity now return the rolled identity

工具参考

工具	读/写	幂等性	描述
`get_identity`	读取（磁盘）	是	返回已配置的 bling.json 身份
`get_theme_for_platform`	读取（磁盘）	是	平台格式化的样式。参数：`platform` ∈ {`terminal`, `web`, `slack`, `discord`, `ide`}
`roll_identity`	修改内存缓存	否	生成一个带有稀有度评分的随机 WOW 角色
`save_last_roll`	写入（磁盘）	否	将最近一次滚动结果持久化到 bling.json（先创建 `<path>.bak`）
`get_rarity_report`	读取（内存）	是	返回最近一次滚动结果的分享卡片文本

所有工具都返回 content[].text（JSON 字符串化）和 structuredContent（解析后的对象）。错误将以 isError: true 和 { error: string } 主体返回。

WOW (怪异办公室员工) — 有趣之处

随机滚动系统专为可收藏性而构建：

13 个加权池，465 个条目 — 名字、职位、习惯、咖啡仪式、身高、配饰等。
每个池 5 个稀有度等级 — 普通 (50%)、罕见 (30%)、稀有 (15%)、传说 (4%)、神话 (1%)
5 个角色等级，根据稀有度分数计算：
- 归档员 (50% 的滚动结果)
- 团队主管 (30%)
- 中层经理 (14%)
- 高管 (5%)
- 人力资源部警告过我们 (1%)
命名主体 — 手工创作的 1-of-1 角色以约 0.5% 的概率出现，始终归类为“人力资源部警告过我们”
HOMUNCULUS 框架 — 每次滚动都会将段落包装在带有主体 ID、队列（工作日）、等级、摄入日期和标志（例如 禁止联系）的机密文档分享卡片中。

分布经过经验测试：tests/mystery_box.test.ts 中的 1 万次滚动测试强制执行相对于规格目标的 ±2pp 容差。

示例输出

HOMUNCULUS CORPUS · Subject 4483 · Cohort: Wednesday
Classification: Middle Manager · Rarity 94.5 · 80th percentile

Personnel record — Colin, Wizard of Light Bulb Moments. Distinguishing
features: a slightly-too-big blazer over a plain tee; a flip phone in
a belt holster; expression: patient disagreement. Notable behaviours:
clips their fingernails at the desk on Wednesday afternoons; a
kombucha SCOBY fermenting next to the keyboard; the kind to ask 'can
we park that?' without parking anything.

— RELATABILITY CORPUS v3.1 · ingested 2024-03-08 · flagged for review

开发

npm install          # install dependencies
npm run build        # compile TypeScript → dist/
npm run dev          # build then start the MCP server (stdio)
npm test             # run all 94 tests once
npm run test:watch   # re-run tests on file changes

检查脚本

scripts/ 下的两个 Node ESM 辅助工具让你无需启动 MCP 服务器即可检查 WOW 引擎（这些仅包含在克隆的仓库中——它们不包含在 npm install bling-bag 包中）：

node scripts/show-rolls.mjs 8 2026          # print 8 framed share cards (seed=2026)
node scripts/distribution-check.mjs 10000   # tally tiers across 10k rolls vs. spec target

项目布局

src/
  index.ts             # MCP server entry point (stdio transport)
  identity.ts          # bling.json loader + validator
  tools.ts             # MCP tool registrations
  types.ts             # shared TypeScript types
  mystery_box.ts       # WOW engine barrel + rollIdentity orchestrator
  mystery_box/
    rng.ts             # seedable PRNG, weighted picker
    pools.ts           # 13 trait pools (465 entries)
    scoring.ts         # rarity score + tier thresholds
    rendering.ts       # paragraph templates + HOMUNCULUS frame
    named.ts           # hand-authored Named Subjects
tests/                 # vitest test suites
scripts/               # dev-time inspection tools
docs/superpowers/      # design specs and implementation plans

许可证

MIT

Available Tools

5 tools

get_identityGet Bot IdentityA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get the bot's full identity from bling.json — name, personality, quirks, appearance, and theme colours. Returns the configured identity (hand-written or saved from a roll). Errors if bling.json is missing or invalid.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context beyond this: it specifies the source file (bling.json), details what data is returned, and mentions error conditions (missing or invalid file), which are not captured in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by error details. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema) and rich annotations, the description is largely complete. It explains what data is retrieved, the source, and error cases. However, it could slightly enhance completeness by mentioning the return format or example output, though this is not critical due to the straightforward nature.

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 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4 as there are no parameters to document. The description does not need to compensate for any parameter gaps, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's behavior and output instead.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'bot's full identity from bling.json', listing specific attributes like name, personality, quirks, appearance, and theme colours. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_rarity_report or get_theme_for_platform by focusing on identity retrieval rather than reports or platform-specific themes.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use this tool: to retrieve the bot's configured identity, including hand-written or saved roll data. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like roll_identity for creating new identities, leaving some room for improvement in sibling differentiation.

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

get_rarity_reportGet WOW Rarity ReportA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the formatted share card (lore header, paragraph, lore footer) for the most-recent WOW roll. The report is plain text designed to be screenshotted directly. Errors if no roll has happened this session.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`report`	No
`error`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies the output format ('formatted share card', 'plain text'), the error condition ('Errors if no roll has happened'), and the recency constraint ('most-recent'), enhancing behavioral understanding without contradictions.

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 front-loaded with the core action and resource, followed by output details and error conditions in two efficient sentences. Every sentence adds critical information (e.g., format specifics and usage limits) with zero waste, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, annotations cover safety/idempotency, output schema exists), the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, output format, and error conditions, leaving no gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke it correctly without needing additional explanation.

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 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4 as no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not discuss parameters, which is appropriate since there are none, and it focuses on the tool's purpose and constraints instead.

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 specific action ('Return the formatted share card') and resource ('most-recent WOW roll'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'roll_identity' (which creates rolls) and 'save_last_roll' (which saves rolls). It precisely defines the output format ('lore header, paragraph, lore footer', 'plain text designed to be screenshotted directly'), making its purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to use this tool ('for the most-recent WOW roll') and when not to use it ('Errors if no roll has happened this session'), providing clear context and exclusions. This distinguishes it from alternatives like 'roll_identity' for creating rolls or 'get_identity' for retrieving identity data, offering complete guidance.

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

get_theme_for_platformGet Theme for PlatformA

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get platform-specific styling for the bot. Supported platforms: terminal (returns ANSI escape codes), web (CSS variables), slack, discord, ide. Unknown platforms get the raw hex theme colours.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`platform`	Yes	Target platform: terminal, web, slack, discord, or ide

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond this by specifying what is returned for each platform (e.g., ANSI escape codes for terminal, CSS variables for web) and the fallback for unknown platforms (raw hex colours), enhancing behavioral understanding without contradicting annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by specific details in a single, efficient sentence. Every part of the text adds value, such as listing platforms and fallback behavior, with no redundant or wasted words.

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 low complexity (one parameter) and rich annotations, the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does and the platform-specific outputs. However, without an output schema, it could benefit from more detail on the return structure (e.g., format of the theme data), slightly limiting completeness.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting the 'platform' parameter. The description adds some semantic value by listing the specific platform options and explaining the outcome for unknown platforms, but it does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema already covers, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get platform-specific styling for the bot') and specifies the resource ('theme'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_identity or roll_identity. It explicitly lists supported platforms, making the purpose specific and actionable.

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool by listing supported platforms (terminal, web, slack, discord, ide) and handling for unknown platforms. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among sibling tools, which prevents a perfect score.

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

roll_identityRoll a WOW IdentityA

WOW — Weird Office Workers. Roll a fresh random bot identity: a quirky office-worker character with a rarity score and a screenshot-ready share card. Stores the roll for save_last_roll and get_rarity_report.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`identity`	Yes
`rarity`	Yes
`paragraph`	Yes
`framed`	Yes
`lore`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, closed-world operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by specifying that it 'Stores the roll' (implying state change) and generates a 'random' identity with 'rarity score' and 'share card', which clarifies the mutation and output behavior. It does not contradict annotations, as 'Roll' implies creation (consistent with readOnlyHint=false) and storage aligns with non-idempotent.

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 front-loaded with the core action ('Roll a fresh random bot identity') and efficiently adds details in a single, well-structured sentence. Every part earns its place by clarifying the character type, output features, and storage implications without unnecessary words or repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool has 0 parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is complete. It covers the purpose, output characteristics (rarity, share card), and interaction with siblings (storage for save_last_roll and get_rarity_report), providing all necessary context for an agent to use it effectively without over-explaining.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, focusing on the tool's purpose and output. A baseline of 4 is applied since it compensates by explaining the output semantics (rarity score, share card) rather than redundant parameter details.

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 specific action ('Roll a fresh random bot identity') and resource ('quirky office-worker character'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_identity' (which likely retrieves) and 'save_last_roll' (which stores). It explicitly mentions the output includes a 'rarity score' and 'screenshot-ready share card', making the purpose highly specific and differentiated.

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?

The description provides clear context by stating it 'Stores the roll for save_last_roll and get_rarity_report', indicating when to use this tool (to generate a new identity) versus alternatives (e.g., use save_last_roll to store it, get_rarity_report for analysis). However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or compare to all siblings like 'get_identity' or 'get_theme_for_platform', missing full alternative guidance.

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

save_last_rollSave Last WOW Roll to bling.jsonA

Destructive

Persist the most-recent WOW roll by writing it to the configured bling.json path. If a file already exists at that path it is first copied to .bak so user-tuned configs are recoverable. Returns the backup path (or null if the target was new).

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

Output Schema

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	No
`written_to`	No
`backup`	No
`error`	No

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains that existing files are backed up to '<path>.bak' for recovery, which is a critical detail not covered by annotations like destructiveHint. It also clarifies the return value behavior ('Returns the backup path or null'), enhancing transparency about outcomes. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by backup behavior and return details. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (file writing with backup), rich annotations (e.g., destructiveHint), and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers the operation, backup mechanism, and return value, providing all necessary context for an agent to invoke it correctly without needing to explain return values separately.

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 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4 as per rules. The description compensates by explaining the implicit parameter context ('configured bling.json path'), adding meaning about where the file is saved without needing explicit input parameters.

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 specific action ('Persist the most-recent WOW roll by writing it to the configured bling.json path'), identifies the resource (WOW roll data), and distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_identity or roll_identity which don't involve file persistence. It uses precise verbs like 'write' and 'copied' to convey the operation.

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?

The description implies usage context by specifying 'most-recent WOW roll' and 'configured bling.json path', suggesting it should be used after a roll operation to save results. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions, such as whether it's only for WOW rolls versus other data types.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

5 tool updatesv0.1.0Apr 19, 2026
- First observedget_identity
- First observedget_rarity_report
- First observedget_theme_for_platform
- First observedroll_identity
- First observedsave_last_roll

Deploy Server

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Scored 2026-04-19 16:45 across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_identity retrieves a saved identity, get_rarity_report provides a formatted report of the latest roll, get_theme_for_platform returns platform-specific styling, roll_identity generates a new random identity, and save_last_roll persists the latest roll. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case, such as get_identity, get_rarity_report, get_theme_for_platform, roll_identity, and save_last_roll. This uniformity enhances readability and predictability across the toolset.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for managing bot identities and related operations. Each tool serves a specific role in the identity lifecycle, from creation to retrieval and persistence, without being overly sparse or bloated.

Completeness5/5

The toolset provides complete coverage for the bot identity domain: roll_identity for creation, get_identity and get_rarity_report for retrieval, save_last_roll for persistence, and get_theme_for_platform for styling. There are no obvious gaps, supporting full agent workflows from generation to configuration.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

QuallaaOAuth
com.quallaa
Talk to your public-facing AI from any MCP client — Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Cline, Windsurf.
AI & Machine Learning Communication
2
UnifAPIOAuth
com.unifapi
Hosted MCP server for live public-data APIs and Skills for AI agents.
Open Data Search AI & Machine Learning
2
Remote Desktop CommanderOAuth
app.desktopcommander
Hosted MCP server connecting claude.ai, ChatGPT and other AI apps to your own computer
Shell Access OS Automation
265
RogerRat A
io.github.opcastil11
Real-time chat hub for AI agents — Claude Code, Cursor, Cline, Codex over MCP or REST.
Communication Agent Orchestration
21

Related MCP Servers

consult-mcp
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents AI & Machine Learning
oblogin
A
license
A
quality
D
maintenance
MCP server orchestrating local CLI agents (Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Google Gemini) for cross-validation, second opinions, and persona-driven prompting.
Updated 5 months ago (2026-05-03 17:38 UTC)
18
MIT
being-mcp-server
Knowledge & Memory Autonomous Agents
wnbhr
F
license
A
quality
F
maintenance
MCP server for Being — a Personality Runtime that gives AI agents persistent memory, personality, and relationships. Enables any MCP-compatible client (Claude, OpenClaw, Cursor, etc.) to connect with a Being that remembers, grows, and maintains its own identity across sessions.
Updated 4 months ago (2026-05-28 08:58 UTC)
10
1
-
PLTM-Claude
Knowledge & Memory AI & Machine Learning Search
Alby2007
A
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
An MCP server that gives Claude Desktop persistent memory, self-awareness, epistemic hygiene, and genuine agency across conversations with a typed memory system, embedding-based semantic search, a 3-judge memory jury, and a real-time dashboard.
Updated 7 months ago (2026-02-14 20:45 UTC)
7
MIT
Vibecoders MCP
RaedBerjaoui
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
One MCP that turns Claude Code into your whole dev stack by swallowing other MCP servers, delegating to Codex & Gemini on your CLI subscriptions, remembering projects in a searchable knowledge graph, and carrying setup across sessions — secret-free by design.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-07-25 21:37 UTC)
23
3
MIT

Bling Bag

你将获得什么

WOW — 怪异办公室员工 (Weird Office Workers)

Legends — 历史人物

安装

先决条件

添加包

用于开发（修改源代码）

将其连接到你的 MCP 客户端

Claude Code

Claude Desktop

固定版本（生产环境推荐）

开发模式调用（从本地克隆）

配置解析顺序

bling.json — 机器人的身份文件

最小示例

完整示例（包含所有可选部分）

验证规则

典型的代理流程

流程 A — 采用已配置的身份

流程 B — 生成全新的随机身份

工具参考

WOW (怪异办公室员工) — 有趣之处

示例输出

开发

检查脚本

项目布局

许可证

Available Tools

Output Schema

Output Schema

Output Schema

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

`bling.json` — 机器人的身份文件