plugin_install

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

While annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds behavioral context: mentions non-interactive permission handling by the daemon. No contradictions. Some additional detail on side effects could improve it.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose sentence, workflow paragraph, and parameter list. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose. Could be tightened slightly but still effective.

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 no output schema, the description mentions return type (dict). Provides comprehensive workflow for post-installation. Lacks explicit mention of error conditions or prerequisites like Docker daemon running, but overall covers the tool's purpose and usage well.

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 fully explains both parameters: remote (Docker Hub reference format with example) and local_name (alias, defaults to remote). Adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare types.

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 installs a plugin from Docker Hub, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like plugin_enable, plugin_configure, plugin_list, and plugin_remove by outlining the installation workflow.

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 provides when-to-use context by describing post-installation steps: use plugin_inspect to confirm, plugin_enable to activate, optionally plugin_configure for settings. Also mentions alternative tools for listing (plugin_list) and removal (plugin_remove).

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