cozyvtt-mcp

Campaign Get

campaign_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve campaign identity, role, health, current map, and capability evidence to orient yourself before acting. Read-only for campaign members, with no game state changes.

Instructions

Read campaign identity, role, health, current map, and capability evidence. Use this for orientation; use map_list for all maps and session_list for sessions. Read-only for campaign members; /health reachability is not feature support, and unprobed capabilities remain unknown. Repeating reads does not change game state. Returns {ok:true,data} on success; tool-body failures return {ok:false,error} with optional diagnostic data. Argument-schema errors are MCP errors.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.0Sep 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: read-only access for campaign members, the caveat that /health reachability does not imply feature support, unknown unprobed capabilities, and idempotence via repeating reads not changing state. It also discloses return-shape and error-handling behavior, which annotations do not cover.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, usage guidance, behavioral caveats, and failure semantics are all included without redundant padding. The key orientation purpose is front-loaded, and the caveats are grouped logically.

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 zero parameters, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs to correctly select and invoke this tool. It explains orientation scope, sibling routing, membership permissions, idempotence, and error response behavior.

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 tool has 0 parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately avoids fabricating parameter guidance, meeting the baseline for a no-parameter tool.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource scope: campaign identity, role, health, current map, and capability evidence. It also distinguishes itself from map_list and session_list, making its purpose specific and 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 says 'Use this for orientation' and directs the agent to alternatives: 'use map_list for all maps and session_list for sessions.' This gives clear when-to-use guidance and names the sibling tools that handle related but different needs.

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