spt-forge-mcp

Resolve Mod Dependencies

resolve_mod_dependencies

Resolves the full recursive dependency tree for mod versions, detects version conflicts, and provides download links.

Instructions

Resolve the full recursive dependency tree for one or more mod versions. Detects version conflicts and provides download links.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "mods": "<mods>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_mod_dependencies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mods`	Yes	Comma-separated identifier:version pairs. E.g. '5:1.2.0,com.example.mod:2.0.5'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. It conveys key behaviors (recursive resolution, conflict detection, download links) but omits details about side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling. The read vs. write nature is not explicitly stated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that covers the essential purpose and outputs without unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded and avoids verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (recursive dependency resolution with conflict detection) and lack of an output schema, the description is brief and does not explain the output format or how results are structured. It provides enough to understand the core function but lacks detail for complete agent understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter description in the input schema already explains the format ('Comma-separated identifier:version pairs'). The tool description adds little beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool resolves the full recursive dependency tree for mod versions, detecting conflicts and providing download links. It uses a specific verb ('Resolve') and resource ('mod dependencies'), but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'resolve_addon_dependencies', slightly reducing clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'check_mod_updates' or 'resolve_addon_dependencies'. There are no hints about prerequisites, context, or conditions for use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server