llm-migrate

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Generate Migration Plan

generate_migration_plan

Generate an actionable migration manifest for your application, analyzing source and target models and producing a reviewable plan with evidence gates. No files are written.

Instructions

Generate an actionable application-level migration manifest without writing files.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`source`	Yes
`target`	Yes
`prompt_sources`	No
`source_endpoint`	No
`source_platform`	No
`target_endpoint`	No
`target_platform`	No
`application_path`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0Sep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / prompt_sources

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.2.0Sep 16, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / source_endpoint

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

addedInput schema / properties / target_endpoint

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}

First observedv1.1.0Aug 31, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool does not write files, which is a key side-effect trait, but it does not mention whether it reads files, requires network access, or any other behavioral aspects. The description is truthful but minimal, earning a middle score.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no fluff, and the key information (application-level, no file writing) is front-loaded. While it could be longer to address other dimensions, the conciseness itself is appropriate; the issue is more about completeness than structure.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 8 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain the meaning of 'actionable,' the nature of the manifest, or how parameters influence the result. Although an output schema exists (so return values need not be described), the lack of usage and parameter guidance makes the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description does not explain any of the 8 parameters (e.g., application_path, source, target, or optional fields). Since the description must compensate for the schema's lack of information, this complete omission is a severe deficiency.

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?

The description clearly states the tool generates an 'actionable application-level migration manifest' and explicitly notes it does so 'without writing files.' This specifies the verb, resource, and scope, and differentiates it from siblings like generate_migration_report (report) and generate_session_migration_plan (session-level) by the 'application-level' qualifier.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and generic description. With many closely related tools in the sibling list, this is a notable gap.

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