create_journal_mnemonsCreate Journal mnemons (log of in-world events). Players may not call this — GM/co-GM only.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| items | Yes | ||
| campaignId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| results | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / properties / items / items / properties / blocksRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Initial content blocks (at least one).",
- "items": {
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "description": "A single content block. Image blocks need assetId OR (data + mimeType).",
- "properties": {
- "assetId": {
- "description": "Image block: pre-uploaded campaign asset id.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "caption": {
- "description": "Image block caption.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "checked": {
- "description": "Todo-block checked state.",
- "type": "boolean"
- },
- "content": {
- "description": "HTML text content for text-type blocks. Use <b>/<i>/<u>/<a>/<br>/<img> — NOT Markdown.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "data": {
- "description": "Image block: inline base64 data (decoded server-side, max 5MB).",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "filename": {
- "description": "Image block filename hint.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "language": {
- "description": "Code-block language hint.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "mimeType": {
- "description": "Image block mime type — required when 'data' is set.",
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": {
- "description": "Block type.",
- "enum": [
- "paragraph",
- "heading1",
- "heading2",
- "bullet_list",
- "numbered_list",
- "todo",
- "quote",
- "code",
- "callout",
- "divider",
- "image"
- ],
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "type"
- ],
- "type": "object"
- },
- "minItems": 1,
- "type": "array"
-}Input schema / properties / items / items / properties / markdownAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Body content as Markdown. Mentions: @[label](mnemon:<entryId>). Images:  — upload the asset first.",
+ "minLength": 1,
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / properties / items / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "title",
- "blocks"
-]New value: +[
+ "title",
+ "markdown"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are all false, so the description must clarify safety/mutation. The description does add the important behavioral fact that only GMs/co-GMs may call this tool. However, it does not disclose batch behavior, validation, partial-failure handling, or any side effects beyond creation, leaving notable gaps in behavioral transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, tightly written sentence that conveys the core purpose and a critical access restriction. No filler or redundant information; every clause carries meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool is functionally rich (batch creation, many optional fields, nested objects, permissions) but the description only covers purpose and permission. With an output schema present, return details are not required, but the lack of usage guidance and parameter insight makes the description incomplete for safe and correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Context reports schema description coverage at 0% for top-level parameters. The description provides no explanation of campaignId or items, and does not help the agent understand the nested structure or required fields. Even though some nested fields (title, markdown) have descriptions, the description itself adds zero parameter semantics, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description states a specific action ('Create Journal mnemons') and clarifies what journal mnemons are ('log of in-world events'), which helps distinguish from sibling mnemon types. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling create tools like create_lore_mnemons or create_session_summary_mnemons, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The only usage guidance is a permission restriction ('Players may not call this — GM/co-GM only.'). It does not explain when to use journal mnemons over other mnemon types, nor when to use create vs update_journal_mnemons. No alternatives are mentioned, so the agent has no context for tool selection beyond the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose. The mnemon tools are separated by type (NPC, Location, Quest, etc.), and other domains like guild, forum, and friend management are also well-segmented. No two tools appear to do the same thing.
Most tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case. Some minor deviations: 'describe_mnemon_types' instead of 'list_mnemon_types', and 'invite_user_by_email' has a slightly different structure. Overall quite consistent.
With 63 tools, the server is quite heavy. While each tool serves a specific purpose for campaign management, the sheer number may be overwhelming. It is borderline but still reasonable given the broad domain coverage.
The tool set covers CRUD for most resources (campaigns, sessions, mnemon types, guilds, friends, forum). Notable gaps: no delete_campaign or delete_session, and update_campaign is limited. However, the core workflows are well-covered.