Retrieve procedural guidelines and domain rules for setting up a local Laravel 13 development environment. Use an optional section filter to access specific setup topics.
Returns procedural guidelines and domain rules for Laravel 13 local development setup. Args: section: Optional keyword to filter content sections.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| section | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns guidelines and supports optional filtering, implying a read-only retrieval. It does not mention edge cases like unknown sections, but the presence of an output schema lowers the need to describe return details.
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 two concise sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the 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 simple one-parameter retrieval tool, the description covers the domain, the resource, and the filtering behavior. The output schema exists, so return structure need not be described. A minor gap is that valid section keywords are not listed, but this is acceptable given the parameter is optional.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly defines the only parameter, 'section', as an optional keyword to filter content sections, adding meaning beyond the schema's type/default fields. It does not enumerate valid keywords, but the parameter is optional and simple.
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 ('Returns') and a resource ('procedural guidelines and domain rules for Laravel 13 local development setup'). It is not a tautology and clearly communicates what the tool provides.
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?
Clear context is provided: the tool is for retrieving Laravel 13 local development guidelines. There are no sibling tools to differentiate from, so no alternative routing is needed, though explicit when-to-use language is absent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.