open-mcp-apps

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Data change probe

get_data_version

Read-onlyIdempotent

Poll the store's global change counter and settings/files sub-counters to detect changes and decide whether to refetch app data. Optionally narrow the check to one collection.

Instructions

Internal: the widget runtime's change probe — the store's global change counter (seq) plus settings/files sub-counters, polled to decide whether to refetch. Not for the model.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`collection`	No	narrow seq to this collection

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`seq`	Yes
`files_version`	Yes
`schema_version`	Yes
`settings_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.1Oct 18, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / collection

Added value: +{
+  "description": "narrow seq to this collection",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Addedv0.7.2Oct 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the probe is polled by the runtime, returns a global seq plus settings/files sub-counters, and is not meant to be invoked by the model — all useful behavioral framing beyond the annotations.

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 with no filler, and the 'Internal' qualifier is front-loaded. The important exclusion ('Not for the model') is buried at the end, but the sentence still reads efficiently.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the rich annotations cover safety. The description supplies the remaining needed context — what the counters represent and who is expected to poll them — leaving little for an agent to guess.

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% and the single 'collection' parameter is already documented as narrowing the seq. The description's mention of a global counter plus sub-counters gives some context on what is being scoped, but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 resource and mechanism: the store's global change counter (seq) plus settings/files sub-counters, exposed as a change probe. The 'Internal... widget runtime' framing clearly separates it from the sibling data_* and file_* tools, though the verb itself is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit exclusion — 'Not for the model' — plus the intended consumer pattern ('polled to decide whether to refetch'), so an agent knows it is not the tool for user-facing data checks. It does not, however, name the sibling an agent should use instead (e.g. data_changes).

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