Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@World Anvil MCP Server Create a new NPC profile for a dwarf blacksmith named Thrain."
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
MCP (Model Context Protocol) server for interfacing with World Anvil API to assist with D&D world development.
This MCP server bridges Claude Code with the World Anvil platform, enabling AI-assisted worldbuilding through structured tools, resources, and prompts. Designed specifically for D&D campaign management and creative writing.
Related MCP server: DMCP
Content Management: Articles, blocks, categories, manuscripts
Map Integration: Interactive maps with markers and layers
Campaign Tools: RPG systems, timelines, session notes
D&D Assistance: NPC generation, location design, quest tracking
Notebook System: Organized notes and documentation
Python 3.11+
uv (fast Python package manager) — https://docs.astral.sh/uv/
World Anvil account with Grandmaster guild membership
World Anvil API application key
World Anvil user authentication token
# Clone repository and enter it
cd world-anvil
# Recommended: create a local virtualenv with uv
uv venv --python 3.11 .venv
# Activate the environment
# macOS/Linux
source .venv/bin/activate
# Windows (PowerShell)
.venv\\Scripts\\Activate.ps1
# Install dependencies (dev extras optional)
uv pip install -e .[dev]
# Tip: you can also run without activating via uv
uv run world-anvil-mcpWithout uv:
python -m venv .venv
source .venv/bin/activate # Windows: .venv\Scripts\Activate.ps1
pip install -e .[dev]Create a .env file:
WORLD_ANVIL_APP_KEY=your_application_key_here
WORLD_ANVIL_USER_TOKEN=your_user_token_here# Start MCP server with stdio transport
world-anvil-mcp
# Or run directly with Python
python -m world_anvil_mcp.serverAdd to your MCP settings:
{
"mcpServers": {
"world-anvil": {
"command": "world-anvil-mcp"
}
}
}Design Specification - Complete architecture and design
API Reference - Tool and resource documentation
Usage Examples - Common workflows
🚧 In Development — Phase 0.4 (Early Implementation)
Architecture and specifications drafted; initial server scaffolding in place.
Quality gates configured (ruff, mypy, pytest); tests being added.
See docs/PHASE_0_STATUS.md for detailed phase tracking and milestones.
BSD 3-Clause License — See LICENSE file for details
Check World Anvil API connection status.
Returns:
Dictionary with API status information
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return type ('Dictionary with API status information'), which adds some behavioral context. However, it does not disclose other traits like error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs, leaving gaps in 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 appropriately sized with two sentences: one stating the purpose and one describing the return value. It is front-loaded with the main function. However, the second sentence could be integrated more smoothly, slightly affecting structure.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no siblings, and an output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. It covers the purpose and return type. The output schema should handle return details, so the description doesn't need to explain values. Minor improvements could include more behavioral context.
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?
The tool has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%. In such cases, the baseline score is 4, as there are no parameters to document. The description does not need to compensate for any parameter gaps.
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?
The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Check World Anvil API connection status.' It uses a specific verb ('Check') and identifies the resource ('World Anvil API connection status'). However, with no sibling tools mentioned, there's no opportunity to distinguish from alternatives, so it cannot achieve a perfect 5.
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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, context for usage, or exclusions. With no sibling tools, this is less critical, but the description still lacks explicit usage instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
get_api_statusWith only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool 'get_api_status' has a clear, singular purpose of checking API connection status, so an agent cannot misselect between non-existent alternatives.
A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency since there is nothing to compare it against. The tool name 'get_api_status' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which would be consistent if more tools were added.
A single tool is too few for a server named 'World Anvil MCP Server', which suggests a broader domain like world-building or content management. This minimal toolset severely limits functionality and does not match the implied scope, making it inappropriate for typical agent workflows.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for the apparent domain. With only an API status check, there are obvious gaps in core operations such as creating, reading, updating, or deleting world-building content (e.g., articles, characters, timelines). This will cause agent failures as basic CRUD/lifecycle coverage is entirely missing.
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Official remote MCP server for Archivist AI TTRPG campaign memory: characters, sessions, and more.
MCP server for Argo RPG Platform — connects AI assistants to campaign data via OAuth2
MCP server for AI dialogue using various LLM models via AceDataCloud
An MCP server that integrates with Discord to provide AI-powered features.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/datagen24/World-Anvil-MCP'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server
