Lists addMod events registered by each cached mod with totals per event, and supports filtering by a specific event such as onUnitInZone to inspect mod event usage.
Which addMod events each cached mod registers (latest versions), with totals per event.
Optional event filter, e.g. 'onUnitInZone'.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| event | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.4.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that only cached mods at their latest versions are counted and that results are aggregated with totals per event. It says nothing about ordering, result size, or what happens with an unknown event name.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, with the parameter note second. No filler and nothing restated from the title or schema.
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-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is measured, what is aggregated, and what the filter does — enough to call it correctly. Return-shape details (field names, ordering, pagination) are absent but minor.
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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter has no schema description, but the description compensates by naming the filter and giving a concrete example value ('onUnitInZone'). It does not say whether matching is exact or partial, or whether the name is case-sensitive, so matching semantics remain ambiguous.
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+resource: it reports which addMod events each cached mod registers, with per-event totals. The scope ('cached mods', 'latest versions') is clear enough to distinguish it from list_mods, though no sibling is named explicitly.
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 — an agent can infer you call this to audit event registrations, and the optional `event` filter hints at narrowing by one event. There is no statement of when to prefer this over siblings like list_mods or search_mod_code, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.