Upgrade Brief

by dev.workers.shopttyass-85f.upgrade-brief

crates breaking changes

crates_breaking_changes

Read-onlyIdempotent

Rust crate upgrade brief between two versions: removed and changed Cargo features, default feature changes, dependency requirement diff, rust-version (MSRV) and edition changes, yanked releases in the range, breaking items from GitHub releases and CHANGELOG, the Cargo.toml edit. Paid: $0.005 USDC per call via x402.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "crate": "<crate>",
      "from": "<from>"
    },
    "name": "crates_breaking_changes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	No	Target version: exact, or a major prefix meaning its first release. Default: latest
`from`	Yes	Version you use now: exact or a major/minor prefix meaning its newest release
`crate`	Yes	crates.io crate name, e.g. 'tokio', 'clap'
`features`	No	Optional comma-separated Cargo features you enable, to flag removed ones
`prereleases`	No	Include prerelease versions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior by disclosing that the call is metered ('Paid: $0.005 USDC per call via x402'), which an agent must know before invoking. It also clarifies that the range is version-to-version and that 'latest' is the default endpoint, but says nothing about failure modes or latency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the resource then enumerates outputs, with pricing last. Dense but every clause describes a distinct output category; the list form is easy to scan even without bullet structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back, and it does so thoroughly across seven categories. The only gaps are error behavior and how the 'features' filter changes the result, which the schema only partly implies.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so from/to/features/prereleases are already fully documented, and the description adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate; the only marginal gain is reinforcing that the output is scoped to the given version pair.

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?

Names a specific resource+scope ('Rust crate upgrade brief between two versions') and enumerates exactly what the brief contains: feature diffs, MSRV/edition changes, yanked releases, breaking items, Cargo.toml edit. The 'Rust crate' qualifier plus the Cargo-specific vocabulary cleanly separates it from npm_breaking_changes, pypi_breaking_changes and the other language siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'upgrade brief between two versions' implies the use case (evaluating a version bump), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance and no mention of the sibling dependency_upgrade_plan, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool. Usage must be inferred.

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

All Upgrade Brief tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?