Reload a plugin

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that no host restart is required and that store plugins cannot be reloaded in place, but says nothing about whether reload discards plugin state, what happens on failure, or any permission requirements.

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 short sentences with zero waste; the core action is front-loaded and the caveat follows. Every sentence 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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral caveat but leaves the required argument's meaning unexplained. Adequate but with a clear gap on the only parameter.

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% and the description never mentions the single 'id' parameter, so it does not clarify whether it expects a plugin id, a file path, or a URL. Given low coverage, the description should have compensated but does not.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (reload a plugin) and immediately scopes it to dev/URL plugins, explicitly excluding store plugins. An agent can distinguish this from bb_install_plugin and bb_uninstall_plugin without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a clear when-not (store plugins are not reloadable in place) and implies the use case of iterating on a dev/URL plugin without restarting Blockbench. It does not name a sibling alternative, but the exclusion rule is the operative guidance here.

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