Lists installed GoreBox mods, including their info.json and file structure, to help you manage and troubleshoot mod setups.
List all installed GoreBox mods with their info.json contents and file structure.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mods_dir | Yes | Path to the game Mods directory |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.4Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose useful output behavior (returns info.json contents plus file structure), but says nothing about read-only safety, required permissions, or how incomplete/missing mod directories are handled.
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?
One front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb, resource, and returned content are all packed into a single readable clause.
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 one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic return surface (info.json and file structure) but is thin on the shape of results and error behavior. It is adequate but leaves gaps an agent might want when interpreting output.
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?
There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Path to the game Mods directory'), so the schema already documents it. The description adds no format, path-style, or defaulting details beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when schema coverage is high.
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 specific verb (List) and resource (installed GoreBox mods) and clarifies the scope by stating it returns info.json contents and file structure. It is inherently distinguishable from generation siblings like gorebox_generate_mod, but it never explicitly contrasts with them or with any related listing tool.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternative tools. The sentence only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer when listing mods is appropriate versus other gorebox_* or asset-inspection tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.