Update Plugin

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

Annotations only provide readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false. The description adds valuable context: 'overwrite forced on', 'Keeps the plugin's activation state', and the production refusal unless confirm_production=true. These go beyond the generic hints and are not contradictory.

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?

The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Each sentence earns its place: core action, source selection, behavior details. No redundancy or fluff.

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 tool with 7 params and no output schema, it covers the main mechanics, source selection, activation state, and production guard. Minor gaps: doesn't explicitly state that a source is required, and no mention of return behavior beyond the response_format parameter. Still largely 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by clarifying that only ONE source should be picked among slug, url, zip_b64, zip_path (not enforced in schema), explaining zip_path is read by the connector, and detailing confirm_production's role. This exceeds baseline.

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 clearly states the tool 'Update / replace an already-installed plugin in place' with specific verbs and resource. It distinguishes from install/delete/status by noting 'already-installed' and lists source options, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It says 'already-installed plugin' implying not for new installs, and explains the production guard requiring confirm_production=true. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like wp_install_plugin for new installs, so usage context is clear but lacks direct exclusions.

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