sync_configSynchronize Drupal configuration between source and target environments via Drush, optionally previewing changes with a dry run before applying them.
Sync configuration between environments via Drush.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| dry_run | No | ||
| source_env | Yes | ||
| target_env | 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 of behavioral disclosure. 'Sync' implies a write/mutation of the target environment's configuration, but the description does not say whether existing target config is overwritten, what permissions are needed, or how failures/rollbacks behave — only implying safety via the undocumented dry_run flag.
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, so it is efficiently structured. However, it is under-specified for a 3-parameter mutation tool rather than genuinely concise, so it only meets the minimum.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but this mutation tool has no annotations and 0% schema documentation. The description omits directionality, overwrite behavior, and environment naming, leaving real gaps an agent needs to invoke it safely.
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% across 3 parameters, so the description must compensate and does not: it never mentions source_env, target_env, or dry_run, nor the environment naming/syntax expected. The dry_run preview semantics and the default of false are left entirely undocumented.
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 (sync) plus resource (configuration) and names the mechanism (Drush) and scope (between environments). It is clearer than a tautology, but it does not differentiate itself from config-adjacent siblings like export_config, import_config, or diff_config.
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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative, despite the large set of sibling config tools (config_set, export_config, import_config, diff_config, split_config). An agent must infer that this is the environment-to-environment transfer tool rather than the single-config or export/import tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.