plugin_configure

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write) and destructiveHint=false (non-destructive). The description adds that the plugin must be disabled before reconfiguring, implying the tool will fail if active. It does not fully disclose potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing settings) but provides sufficient behavioral context.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, followed by usage guidance and parameter definitions. It is front-loaded, but slightly verbose; every sentence adds value, though minor tightening could improve conciseness.

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 tool's complexity (2 params, nested object) and the presence of an output schema (returns bool), the description covers purpose, parameters, and a detailed usage flow. It lacks mention of error handling but is otherwise 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 0% (no property descriptions), but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: name (with example plugin name) and options (key/value dict matching plugin's env keys, with example format). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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's action: 'Set runtime configuration options on an installed plugin.' It identifies the specific verb ('Set'), resource ('configuration options'), and target ('installed plugin'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like plugin_inspect (read) and plugin_install (install).

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 description provides explicit guidance: use plugin_inspect first to discover keys, disable the plugin before reconfiguring, and enable afterwards. It gives a clear workflow with prerequisites and actions, effectively telling the agent when and how to use this tool.

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