Starts the Verdaccio registry when it is not already running and returns its URL. If no VERDACCIO_URL is set, it launches an embedded registry on a random local port.
Start the Verdaccio registry (if not already running) and return its URL. When no VERDACCIO_URL is configured, an embedded registry is started automatically on a random local port.
| 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 and does well: it discloses idempotency ('if not already running'), the return value, and the conditional embedded-registry behavior keyed on VERDACCIO_URL. It omits auth requirements, blocking behavior, and whether the random port is stable across calls.
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?
Two tight sentences with the action and return value front-loaded, followed by the conditional fallback. No filler or redundancy.
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-param, no-annotation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, idempotency, and return value. It could say more about the port's persistence and auth expectations, but the core operational picture is complete.
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 itself imposes no documentation burden; baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed for a parameterless lifecycle call.
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 verb (Start) and resource (the Verdaccio registry), plus the return value (its URL). It is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the package/token/auth siblings, which operate on registry contents rather than the registry process itself.
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?
Explains the operating context clearly: start only if not already running, and the fallback behavior when VERDACCIO_URL is absent. There is no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternative phrasing, but no real alternative exists for this lifecycle action, so context is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.