plugin_list

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context: it covers managed engine plugins only, and it details the return format ('One attrs dict per installed plugin') plus the significance of the Enabled key. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, then provides essential exclusions and usage guidance, and ends with the return type. Every sentence adds value: scope, usage, and output format. No fluff or repetition.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned, what is included/excluded, and how to use the results. Combined with annotations, the agent has complete information to select and 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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; it focuses on the output structure, which is appropriate. No parameter-related gaps exist.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'List installed engine plugins with their full attrs.' It clearly distinguishes from Docker CLI plugins (compose, buildx, scout), making its scope unmistakable and differentiating it from sibling plugin tools.

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 states when to use it: 'find exact plugin names for plugin_inspect/plugin_enable/plugin_disable/plugin_remove'. It also clarifies what it covers (managed engine plugins) and what it does NOT cover, providing clear alternatives.

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