Mark a specific version of an npm package as deprecated with a custom message, or remove deprecation by providing an empty string.
Deprecate a version of a package
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| otp | No | One-time password for 2FA | |
| message | Yes | Deprecation message (empty string to undeprecate) | |
| package | Yes | Package@version range (e.g. pkg@<1.0.0) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as that deprecated versions remain installable with warnings, the need for OTP for 2FA, or that an empty message undeprecates (though the input schema mentions this).
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 a single sentence, concise and to the point. No wasted words, but lacks structure like bullet points for important details.
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?
The tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is too minimal; it does not explain return values, error conditions, or provide enough context for an agent to use it correctly.
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 100% with descriptions for all parameters (package, message, otp). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, 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 clearly states the action (deprecate) and the resource (version of a package), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'publish' or 'unpublish'. However, it could be more specific by mentioning version ranges.
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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use deprecate versus alternatives like 'unpublish' or other package management commands.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.