Imports a Modrinth .mrpack to create a Prism Launcher instance, downloads client files with SHA1 verification, and extracts overrides using the pack’s Minecraft and loader versions.
Import a Modrinth .mrpack file: creates the instance from the pack's declared Minecraft/loader versions, downloads every client file with sha1 verification, and extracts overrides.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| path | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the pipeline: instance creation from declared versions, file downloads with sha1 verification, and overrides extraction. It omits critical mutation traits such as whether an existing instance is overwritten, network/API requirements, disk impact, and behavior on partial failure or checksum mismatch.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with three tightly scoped clauses; every clause adds operational information and none restates the tool name. No filler or redundancy.
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?
The description adequately conveys the import workflow, but for a no-annotation, no-output-schema mutation tool it leaves the two parameter meanings and the result (instance identifier or path on success) unaddressed. Enough to call it, not enough to call it confidently.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0% for both parameters, so the description must compensate and does not: it never explains that 'path' points to the local .mrpack file or that 'name' overrides the derived instance name. The one clause about 'the pack's declared Minecraft/loader versions' describes pack contents, not the parameters.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Import a Modrinth .mrpack file') and enumerates the three concrete steps performed. Naming the Modrinth format implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling import_modpack_cf, but the description never explicitly routes the agent to that sibling.
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?
Usage is only implied by the file-format qualifier; there is no statement about when to use this instead of create_instance, install_modpack, or import_modpack_cf. An agent can infer the intent but is given no explicit conditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.