Publish an elastic schema version definition to StatelyDB. Use it to validate and manage schemas through the StatelyDB CLI.
Publish an elastic schema version definition to StatelyDB
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| schema | Yes | The schema definition to publish | |
| schemaId | Yes | The schema ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Publish' implies a persistent mutation, but the description does not disclose whether published versions are immutable, whether re-publishing the same schemaId is allowed, what permissions are required, or what happens on conflict.
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 no filler words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's surface, though its brevity is partly under-specification rather than discipline.
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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits the workflow context an agent needs: preconditions (validation), the effect of publishing on existing versions, and the expected result. The safety and sequencing burden falls entirely on guesses.
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 100%, so both parameters are fully documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing beyond the schema — it does not clarify the expected format of 'schema' (elastic schema DSL?) or the ID conventions for 'schemaId'.
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 ('Publish') and resource ('elastic schema version definition to StatelyDB'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling verbs like statelydb-validate-schema or statelydb-schema-generate, though the verb choice implicitly separates it.
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?
There is no guidance on when to publish versus validate or generate, and no prerequisite stated (e.g., whether the schema must first pass statelydb-validate-schema or statelydb-validate-migrations). The agent must infer the workflow from sibling names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.