Retrieve any config file from a Minecraft instance's root folder by providing its relative path, enabling quick inspection of mod settings for diagnosis or editing.
Read a config file relative to the current instance root.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Relative path, e.g. config/mekanism-common.toml |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of signaling safety and behavior. It indicates a non-destructive read and clarifies path resolution relative to the instance root, but it does not mention error behavior, permission requirements, or what the tool returns.
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 sentence with no filler. The core verb, object, and path-scoping constraint are all front-loaded and every word earns its place.
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 one-parameter read operation, the description and schema cover the essentials for invocation. However, with no output schema it does not describe the return format, and it omits preconditions like having a current instance or when to prefer edit_config.
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?
The schema already documents path at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating that the path is resolved 'relative to the current instance root,' which the schema's 'Relative path' alone does not specify.
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 names a precise action ('read') and resource ('config file'), and scopes it to 'the current instance root.' This clearly separates it from sibling tools like list_configs and edit_config without needing to open their schemas.
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 explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over list_configs, edit_config, or other siblings, and no mention of prerequisites such as an active instance. The intended use is inferable from the verb 'read,' but the description does not state it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.