Lists single-player worlds for a Prism Launcher instance, returning level.dat details such as name, version, game mode, seed, and last played to inspect or manage saves.
List single-player worlds (saves/) with level.dat info: name, version, game mode, seed, last played.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instance | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It does disclose the returned data (name, version, game mode, seed, last played), which conveys read-only, low-risk behavior, but it says nothing about what happens if saves/ is missing or whether the instance must be stopped.
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?
One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the returned fields are stated immediately.
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?
No output schema exists, and the description helpfully enumerates the fields returned, which covers the response shape. However, it omits the instance scoping, error/empty behavior, and ordering, leaving an agent to guess at the edges.
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 the single required 'instance' parameter, and the description never mentions it. The 'saves/' reference hints that paths are instance-relative but never explains what identifier is expected, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.
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?
Specific verb+resource: 'List single-player worlds (saves/)' plus the concrete data source (level.dat) and returned fields. It implicitly distinguishes itself from get_world, which handles a single world, but never names that sibling explicitly.
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?
No statement of when to call this versus get_world, copy_world, or backup_world, and no prerequisites (e.g. whether the instance must exist or be closed). The purpose sentence implies a browse operation but gives no selection guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.