Retrieve all autoload singletons set up in the project to manage globally accessible nodes.
Get all autoload singletons configured in the project
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "get_autoloads"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It merely states the action without disclosing any behavioral traits (e.g., whether it's read-only, side effects, or return format).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose; no wasted space.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only listing with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys functionality. It could be slightly enhanced by hinting at the return type (e.g., 'returns a list of names'), but is sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially fully covered. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed. Baseline of 4 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Get all autoload singletons configured in the project' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('autoload singletons'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling 'get_autoload' which likely retrieves a specific singleton.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implicitly suggests usage for listing all autoloads, but does not explicitly guide when to use this vs. alternatives like 'get_autoload'. No exclusion criteria or context provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.