Lists MAME image devices for a Tandy Color Computer 3 emulation, including flop1 and flop2, with tag, briefname, filename, and exists flag.
List MAME image devices, including flop1 and flop2, with tag, briefname, filename, and exists.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only list but doesn't state the safety profile, whether it requires a running emulator, or how the result is structured beyond field names.
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 waste. It efficiently communicates the resource and the returned fields.
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 zero-param list tool, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, an agent lacks confirmation that this is a safe read operation and that no prerequisite state (such as a running session) is required.
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?
Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly indicates no inputs are required and identifies what the output records contain.
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 (List) and resource (MAME image devices), with concrete examples (flop1, flop2). It doesn't reference any sibling tools, but the resource is distinct from mount/unmount/load state operations in the sibling list.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent cannot infer from the description alone whether this is a discovery step before coco_mount_flop or something else.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.