List all mods and resource packs on the current Minecraft instance, with optional filters for type, name, and enabled status to quickly identify active content.
List mods (and optional resource packs) on the current instance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| kind | No | ||
| query | No | Filter by name, file, or addon id | |
| enabledOnly | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description bears the responsibility for behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' conveys a read-only intent, but the description does not explain the meaning of 'current instance', whether anything is modified, or what happens with default settings. This is adequate but minimal.
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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns its place, but it is slightly under-specified for a tool with three parameters and no output schema.
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?
With three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description is not enough. It does not state what fields are returned, how query or enabledOnly affect results, or what 'all' means for the kind parameter. The tool is understandable at a high level but not fully specified for reliable autonomous invocation.
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 only 33% since query is the only documented parameter. The description partially clarifies kind by mentioning optional resource packs, but it does not explain the enum values mod/resourcepack/all, the default behavior, or the enabledOnly parameter. Low schema coverage requires more compensation than this.
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 ('List'), a clear resource ('mods and optional resource packs'), and a scope ('current instance'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like list_worlds, list_instances, list_configs, and list_logs, and the verb also separates it from compare_mods, analyze_mods, and recommend_mods.
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 guidance is given about when to use this tool versus the related analyze_mods, compare_mods, or recommend_mods tools. The phrase 'current instance' implies some prior context selection, but there is no mention of that prerequisite or any exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.