Fetches the SplitHub cloud config and writes dashboard-created A/B experiments into splithub.config.ts, keeping your app’s TypeScript experiment setup in sync.
Fetch the cloud config and write dashboard-created experiments into splithub.config.ts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It says it writes into splithub.config.ts but not whether local edits are overwritten, merged, or preserved, nor auth requirements or failure behavior — a serious gap for a tool that mutates a local file.
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?
One tight sentence with the action and destination front-loaded and no filler. It is terse to the point of omitting the overwrite/merge behavior, but nothing present is wasted.
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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the what but not the consequences: whether the local config is replaced or merged, and what the caller gets back. Adequate to identify the tool, insufficient to predict its effects.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema imposes no documentation burden and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate.
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 pair of verbs (fetch, write) and both resources: cloud config and dashboard-created experiments, landed into splithub.config.ts. The direction (cloud → local) is clear enough to separate it from the sibling splithub_push, though the description never names push 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?
The cloud-to-local direction is implied, so an agent can infer this is the sync-down step after dashboard edits, but there is no explicit 'use when' condition, no prerequisite (e.g. login/init), and no named alternative such as splithub_push.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.