cozyvtt-mcp

Character Get

character_get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a character sheet by ID, preserving unknown fields and game-system-specific data. Use character_list to find IDs, then retrieve the full sheet for CoC or DND.

Instructions

Read a full character sheet by ID, preserving unknown fields. Use character_list to discover roster IDs and character_update to patch a sheet. Upstream allows the owner or campaign members to read; keeper data.notes are not private DM fields. Interpret data using the character's own gameSystem, preserving CoC fields and DND hitDice structures. Repeated reads do not alter the sheet. 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
`character_id`	Yes	Existing character ID, normally discovered with character_list; the sheet may use its own gameSystem.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Sep 20, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / character_id / description

Added value: +"Existing character ID, normally discovered with character_list; the sheet may use its own gameSystem."

First observedv0.1.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive hints, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: preserving unknown fields, gameSystem-specific interpretation, visibility of keeper data.notes, repeated reads not altering the sheet, and the ok/error return envelope. This is substantial added behavioral detail with no contradiction.

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 dense yet compact, with the primary action front-loaded and every sentence earning its place by adding routing, permission, data-interpretation, or error-handling context. There is no filler or repetition of annotation values.

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?

With a single simple parameter, rich annotations, and a thorough description covering discovery, permissions, data semantics, idempotency, and failure modes, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool correctly. The output schema also covers return-value structure, so nothing critical is missing.

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 already documents character_id fully at 100% coverage. The description reinforces that the ID is discovered via character_list and that the sheet may use its own gameSystem, but it does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema's parameter description.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read a full character sheet by ID', which clearly states the operation. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming character_list for roster discovery and character_update for patching, so an agent can tell them apart.

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 provides explicit routing guidance: 'Use character_list to discover roster IDs and character_update to patch a sheet.' It also gives access context by explaining who upstream allows to read, which helps an agent decide when this tool is appropriate.

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