Retrieve the merge variables a plugin instance renders from TRMNL so you can inspect the JSON data available for a given plugin setting.
Read the merge variables a plugin instance renders from TRMNL GET /api/plugin_settings/{plugin_setting_id}/merge_variables.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| profile | No | Configured profile name; defaults to default. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by identifying the underlying TRMNL GET endpoint, but it does not disclose return shape, authentication needs, or pagination behavior. With rich annotations, this is an adequate but not rich behavioral description.
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?
The description is a single efficient sentence with no wasted language. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the endpoint is included as useful disambiguating context.
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 tool is a read-only operation with no output schema, so the description should ideally clarify what the returned merge variables look like or how they are scoped. It states the resource clearly and annotations cover safety, but the omission of return-shape context leaves a gap for an agent that needs to consume the result.
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 50%, and the schema itself describes both leaf parameters: plugin_setting_id and profile. The description reinforces the plugin_setting_id path via the endpoint template but adds no meaning for the profile parameter or nested path object beyond what the schema provides.
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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and a precisely scoped resource ('merge variables a plugin instance renders'), and it includes the exact TRMNL endpoint. This distinguishes it from broader sibling tools such as trmnl_get_plugin_setting_data or trmnl_get_plugin_setting_details.
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 implies the tool's use by saying it reads merge variables for a plugin instance, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives. An agent is left to infer that this is the right tool when merge variables are needed rather than general plugin setting data.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.