Retrieve a Minecraft mod's Modrinth version history, including release dates and loader support, to verify changes and enrich generated changelogs.
查询 Modrinth 上某个模组的历史版本信息（发布日期、加载器支持等）
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | 返回版本数量上限，默认 5 | |
| mod_name | Yes | 模组名称或 slug（如 sodium、fabric-api） |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only query and discloses what comes back (发布日期、加载器支持等), but says nothing about Modrinth API rate limits, behavior when the mod is not found, or ordering of results.
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 that identifies the resource and the main returned fields without padding. It is appropriately sized, though it could also mention the limit or ordering.
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?
There is no output schema, so the description must convey the return shape; naming 发布日期 and 加载器支持 is a start, but '等' and the absence of ordering or pagination hints leave it partially specified for a version-history listing tool.
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 100%, so both mod_name (slug examples) and limit (default 5) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.
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 a specific verb+resource: query a mod's historical version info on Modrinth, and names the returned content (release date, loader support). It clearly differs from changelog-generation siblings, but doesn't explicitly say so.
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?
Usage is only implied: fetch raw version history, as opposed to generate_changelog or generate_full_changelog which produce derived output. No explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternatives are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.