Skip to main content
Glama

modrinth_files_update

Read-only

Resolve the latest compatible update for several Modrinth files in one native POST read and return a map from each requested hash to the version object that satisfies the shared loader and game-version filters. Send hashes plus optional loaders and game_versions arrays; unknown hashes are omitted and an empty hash array is valid.

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": {
      "hashes": "<hashes>"
    },
    "name": "modrinth_files_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hashesYesRequired JSON array of file hashes (40 hexadecimal SHA-1 or 128 hexadecimal SHA-512 characters). An empty array is valid.
loadersNoOptional loader names applied to every hash. Discover the values with modrinth_tags and type=loader. An explicit empty array stays distinct from omission.
algorithmNoOptional hash algorithm, sha1 or sha512; omit it for native auto-detection from the first hash.
game_versionsNoOptional game versions applied to every hash. Discover the values with modrinth_tags and type=game_version. An explicit empty array stays distinct from omission.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description usefully adds that the operation is a 'native POST read' and returns a hash→version map, which pre-empts the confusion of a POST that does not mutate. It also discloses partial-result semantics (unknown hashes silently omitted), behavior the annotations do not cover.

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?

One dense sentence that front-loads the action, then the inputs, then the return value and edge cases. It is information-rich with no filler, though a sentence break would aid scanability.

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?

For a batch read with a described output schema and fully annotated parameters, the definition covers action, inputs, return shape, and error/edge behavior (unknown hashes omitted, empty array valid). An agent has everything needed to call it correctly without opening schemas.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already documents its format, allowed values, and the empty-vs-omitted distinction, so the schema carries the load. The description echoes 'hashes plus optional loaders and game_versions arrays' and omits the algorithm parameter entirely, adding little beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Resolve the latest compatible update for several Modrinth files') and clarifies the batch/native-POST nature plus the return shape (map from hash to version object). The word 'several' together with 'in one native POST read' implicitly separates it from the individual-file sibling, but no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Gives concrete invocation guidance ('Send hashes plus optional loaders and game_versions arrays') and edge-case behavior (unknown hashes omitted, empty array valid), which implies when the tool applies. However it never states when to prefer this batch form over modrinth_files_update_individual or modrinth_file_update, so the when-to-use dimension is only implied.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.