plugin_disable

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

Annotations set readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds crucial behavioral details: disabled plugins remain installed, existing containers are unaffected, force may disrupt containers. This provides the needed transparency beyond annotations.

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: main action and key constraint first, then force implications, then parameter docs. Every sentence adds value, no fluff. Front-loaded with essential info.

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 has 2 parameters and an output schema (returns bool), the description covers purpose, parameters, behavior, side effects, and return value. It is complete for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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%, but the description explicitly explains both parameters (name and force), including the force parameter's effect and default. This adds full semantic meaning that the schema lacks.

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 action (disable) and the resource (plugin), with specific details about what disabling means (stops intercepting API calls, remains installed). It distinguishes from sibling tools like plugin_enable and plugin_remove.

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 clear when-to-use guidance, explains the force parameter's consequences, and directs to plugin_enable for re-enabling. It implicitly covers when not to use (e.g., if removal is needed, use plugin_remove).

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