diff_configCompare Drupal configuration between environments to spot differences before deployment or debugging. Provide a config name and target environments to see what changed.
Show differences in configuration between environments.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env1 | No | staging | |
| env2 | No | prod | |
| config_name | Yes |
| 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?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Show differences' implies a read-only comparison, but it does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating, what permissions are required, or whether it reads active or exported config. The output schema covers return values, but behavioral traits beyond the basic action are absent.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity contributes to gaps elsewhere.
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?
Given the output schema exists, return values need not be described, but with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage the description should do more for the three parameters. It provides only the high-level operation, leaving usage and parameter semantics incomplete for an agent.
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%, and the description does not mention env1, env2, or config_name. The phrase 'between environments' loosely maps to the env parameters, but no format, accepted values, or defaults are explained.
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 ('Show differences') and resource ('configuration') with a clear scope ('between environments'). It does not name or distinguish itself from sibling config tools such as config_get or sync_config, so an agent must infer the differentiation.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like config_get or sync_config, nor any stated prerequisites or exclusions. Only the phrase 'between environments' implicitly scopes its use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.