devdocs-mcp

download_doc

Download one or multiple documentation sets from devdocs.io by specifying slugs, with an optional version for a single slug.

Instructions

Download one or more documentation bundles from devdocs.io.

Args: slugs: Single slug string or list of documentation slugs (e.g. 'javascript' or ['javascript', 'python', 'react']) version: Optional version specifier for single slug (ignored for multiple slugs, uses latest)

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": {
      "slugs": "<slugs>"
    },
    "name": "download_doc"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slugs`	Yes
`version`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses version-handling behavior ('ignored for multiple slugs, uses latest') but does not mention side effects like filesystem writes, network requirements, or authentication needs.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is compact and well-structured, with a one-line summary followed by a clear Args block. Every sentence adds value; there is no redundancy or filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, there are gaps: no mention of when to prefer this over siblings, and no disclosure of potential side effects or prerequisites beyond the parameter details. It is minimally viable but not thorough.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates. It explains that slugs accepts a single string or list of strings with concrete examples, and clarifies that version is optional and ignored for multiple slugs—details not present in the bare schema.

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 'Download one or more documentation bundles from devdocs.io,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_document (which likely fetches a single document) by emphasizing bundle downloads and supporting multiple slugs.

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 description implies usage when you need to download documentation bundles but does not explicitly compare to alternatives such as get_document or list_docs. There is no 'when to use' vs 'when not to use' guidance.

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

Deploy Server