dmcheck 0.1.0

Deterministic conduct verdicts for live tabletop sessions — CI for running a game. Findings cite the table charter; ambiguity produces silence, never accusations.

dmcheck

Deterministic conduct verdicts for live tabletop sessions — CI for running a game.

Feed it a session transcript (and optionally an engine event ledger) plus a table charter, and it returns named findings — the player whose question was never answered, the dice roll nobody acknowledged, the turn that began without anyone being told, the spoiler that leaked into the channel, the five-minute dead air. Every finding cites the charter rule it violates, with the evidence attached.

The design contract: a false accusation is the unforgivable bug. A rule fires only when the transcript provably shows the violation — ambiguity produces silence, never noise. The verdict path is model-free and deterministic: same transcript, same findings, every time.

30 seconds to a refereed session

$ pip install dmcheck          # stdlib only, no dependencies
$ dmcheck run session.jsonl --gm "Greta"
{
 "messages": 9,
 "findings": [
  {"rule": "R2", "summary": "unconsumed-roll: a dice result was never followed by any GM message",
   "charter": "roll_ack_within_messages=4",
   "detail": "dice result from DiceBot never followed by a GM message",
   "evidence": {"index": 6, "author": "DiceBot", "content": "Bram rolls 1d20+4: [18] = 22"}},
  ...
 ],
 "counts": {"R1": 1, "R2": 1, "R6": 1, "R7": 1, "R8": 1}
}

Transcript formats: JSONL of {ts, author, content}, or a JSON array of Discord-API-shaped messages ({timestamp, author: {username}, content}) in either order.

The rule set (each one paid for by a real table failure)

Rule	Fires when	Origin story
R1	a player's question got no GM response within threshold	a player asked the DM a lore question; another player ended up answering
R2	a dice result was never followed by any GM message	"did I hit?" — a player's successful attack roll sat unacknowledged
R3	an engine event was never narrated to the table	the state engine resolved a hit the table never heard about
R4	a turn began and the GM never addressed the actor by name	"isn't it her turn?" — asked by a player, which is one player too many
R5	someone acted out of initiative (needs the ledger)	engine rejected it silently; the table never knew
R6	a configured hidden term appeared in a GM message	a module's secret state names leaked into narration
R7	GM dead air beyond threshold while a player waited	30 seconds reads as thinking; five minutes reads as absence
R8	the session ended with open R1–R3 findings in its tail	sessions should end in a defined state — that's what makes the next one possible

These came from running a hybrid table — human and AI players, an AI GM — on Discord, where every one of these failures actually happened and got codified the same week. They apply equally to human GMs: run dmcheck over your own exported game log and see what your table's transcript says.

The charter is config, not code

charters/default.json ships thresholds and conventions derived from a real table's protocol. Override any of it — cue conventions, dead-air tolerance, dice-bot names, hidden-term lists — and version it. A league or organized-play program could publish a charter the way they publish a player's guide; dmcheck then referees any table against it.

$ dmcheck run session.jsonl --charter our-table.json --ledger events.jsonl
$ dmcheck rules            # the rule set with definitions
$ dmcheck --schema         # machine-readable I/O contract

For agents

• tool.json at the repo root; --schema; exit codes: 0 clean · 1 findings · 2 charter/input unusable.
• MCP server: dmcheck-mcp (stdio) with tools run and rules.
• Findings are structured JSON with rule id, charter citation, human-readable detail, and an evidence span — built to be consumed by a GM agent that fixes its own procedure between beats.

What it does NOT do (on purpose)

• No rules adjudication — whether the attack was legal is srdcheck's job.
• No character math — that's charactercheck. (srdcheck judges the rules, charactercheck derives the actor, dmcheck referees the table.)
• No narrative-quality judging — whether the prose was good is taste, and taste is not checkable. dmcheck checks procedure only.
• No model calls, no scores — deterministic findings per rule, never a blended "DM grade."

Credits

The rule set was distilled from live hybrid (human + AI) table sessions; the Router+Detector pattern in native-gaming-harness independently converged on the same idea, which we take as evidence it's the load-bearing piece. dmcheck is game-system-agnostic and unaffiliated with any publisher.

mcp-name: io.github.chaoz23/dmcheck