list_modsRetrieve the 10 latest added, latest updated, or trending mods for any Nexus Mods game by specifying the game domain and list type.
10 mods per list: latest_added, latest_updated or trending for a game.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| game | Yes | Game domain name as in site URLs, e.g. "skyrimspecialedition", "fallout4", "stardewvalley" | |
| list | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. The description adds the 10-mod limit, which is useful, but does not describe the return format, pagination, or ordering semantics beyond the enum names. It neither contradicts nor substantially expands beyond annotations.
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 conveys the core behavior and the key limit. No wasted words, and the most important constraint (10 per list) appears first.
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 list tool, the description covers the required parameters and the output count, but it does not explain the meaning of the list types, the return structure, or how it differs from get_updated_mods. With no output schema and only 50% schema coverage, a bit more context would be needed for full agent confidence.
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%: 'game' has a descriptive explanation, but 'list' only has an enum with no per-value semantics. The description repeats the enum values without explaining what each means (e.g., what 'trending' is based on). It adds marginal value over the schema but does not fully compensate for the missing list descriptions.
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 states the verb ('list') and the resource ('mods') and specifies three list types. It is clear but does not differentiate from siblings like get_updated_mods, which overlaps in purpose. It lacks an explicit statement of what it is not.
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 usage by enumerating the three list types and the 10-mod limit, but gives no guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like get_updated_mods. There is no 'when not to use' or mention of alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.