Nest Protect MCP Server

import_config_file

Load configuration settings from a local file and merge them into the server state.

Instructions

Import Config From File.

Load configuration settings from a local file and merge them into the server state.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "import_config_file"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes	Parameters for importing config.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states loading and merging into server state, implying state modification. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, error handling, file format expectations, side effects, or whether the operation is reversible. The merge behavior is implied but not fully detailed (e.g., what happens when merge=false). Adequate but not thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Import Config From File'). No superfluous words. Efficiently conveys the core purpose and operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description is mostly complete for the core operation. However, it lacks details on return value, success/failure signals, and edge cases (e.g., file not found, merge vs replace behavior not explicitly stated). Could be more helpful for an agent to understand the full impact.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% (both params described). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'merge them into the server state', which repeats the merge parameter. No additional context about file_path (e.g., local vs remote, supported formats). Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool imports config from a file and merges into server state. The verb 'import' and resource 'config from file' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like export_config_file (export) and reset_mcp_config (reset). The mention of merging adds clarity, aligning with the merge parameter.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_mcp_config or export_config_file. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. Users are left to infer from the tool name and schema.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.