Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

modrinth_dependencies

Retrieve native public dependency metadata for a Modrinth project by ID to see exactly which resources it requires or supports.

Instructions

Get project dependency metadata. Returns the native public Modrinth metadata for this resource. See the endpoint reference for exact request and response behavior.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "modrinth_dependencies"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNative id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Non-destructive and read-only are implied, but the description explicitly states the return object is the native public Modrinth metadata, which is useful context, though it is thin on whether dependencies are version-specific, recursive, or paginated.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and return type. The final sentence does little beyond the second, but the description is far from bloated.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an ambiguous id parameter, the description should close more gaps than it does. It omits what the dependency payload looks like and whether version context is needed, leaving an agent unable to predict the response shape before calling.

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 reported at 100%, but the single parameter's description is only "Native id", which does not identify whether it is a project id, version id, or slug. The description does not compensate, since "this resource" is equally vague; baseline 3 applies because the schema nominally covers the parameter.

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

Purpose3/5

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

States a verb and resource ("Get project dependency metadata") but leaves two things ambiguous: whether dependencies are resolved for a project or a version, and what "this resource" refers to. It also fails to differentiate from siblings like modrinth_project_version or modrinth_version, which plausibly return overlapping metadata.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of the project, project_version, or version tools, and no prerequisites stated (e.g., whether a version id is required to resolve dependencies). Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools