View engine development configuration parameters. Secret values are masked as , so you can inspect settings without exposing sensitive data.
Parameters of config.json. Secret values come back as - never ask for the real ones.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| reload | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v6.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that secret values return as <hidden>, which is a useful behavioral trait. However, it says nothing about side effects, permissions, or whether the 'reload' parameter triggers an action, leaving much undisclosed.
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?
The description is brief at two sentences with no waste, which is good. However, the front-loaded sentence is vague, and the structure does not prioritize the most essential information (tool action) before secondary hints.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and a single optional parameter, the description is far too thin. It provides a hint about secrets but fails to explain the tool's core purpose, the reload parameter, or any return behavior, leaving agents guessing.
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 description does not explain the 'reload' boolean parameter at all. It mentions 'Parameters of config.json' generically but never clarifies what the parameter does or how to use it, so no meaning is added beyond the schema.
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 'Parameters of config.json' but lacks an explicit verb or action (e.g., get, set, reload). It identifies the resource but not what the tool does with it. Compared to sibling tools with clear verbs like 'load' and 'save', this is ambiguous.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned. The only note about secrets is a behavioral hint, not usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.