st.plugin.configure

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the key behavioral trait: the operation requires confirm: true and restart, signaling that this mutates persistent configuration and has side effects. It does not cover permission needs, reversibility, or the effect on existing flags, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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?

Two sentences with no filler; purpose is front-loaded and the critical prerequisite/consequence is in a short second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves too much unspecified: the semantics of snapshotLabel, what the enable flags actually do, and what the response looks like after configuration. The confirm/restart caveat is helpful but not enough to make the tool safely invocable by an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies the confirm parameter ('Requires confirm: true'). The other three parameters (snapshotLabel, enableServerPlugins, enableServerPluginsAutoUpdate) receive no explanation, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 states a specific action ('Configure') and target ('SillyTavern server plugin flags in config.yaml'), clearly separating it from sibling plugin scaffold/install/registry tools. It does not explicitly contrast with generic config-editing siblings like st.config.patch or st.resource.patch, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 target ('server plugin flags in config.yaml') implies when to use, and 'Requires confirm: true and restart' gives an important invocation condition and consequence. However it never states when-not-to-use or names an alternative, so usage guidance is primarily implicit.

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