actiond_plugin_disable

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

The description discloses that the plugin remains registered after disabling, a behavioral detail beyond what annotations convey (non-destructive, idempotent). It also notes the effect on event triggers and that re-enabling is possible, adding transparency about the operation's impact.

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 concise and well-organized, with a clear statement of purpose followed by behavioral details and usage guidance. It avoids redundancy and includes only essential information, making it easy to parse.

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 simple interface (one parameter, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers purpose, behavior, and related tools. It even mentions the profile_set alternative for different scenarios, providing enough context for an agent to decide when to invoke this 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?

The tool description does not elaborate on the parameter beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100% with a clear example in the parameter description, baseline score of 3 is appropriate; no additional meaning is added by the description.

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 function: disabling a CI/CD plugin. It explains the effect (no longer triggers) and provides context for its use (skipping checks, shortening CI). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning re-enable and alternative profile_set.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use this tool versus alternatives: for broad preset scope changes, prefer actiond_profile_set. It also directs users to discover plugin names via actiond_plugins_list, giving clear guidance on prerequisites.

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