List all node plugins registered in the Remnawave VPN panel to review available extensions and their configurations.
List all node plugins
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "node_plugins_list"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'List all node plugins' clearly indicates a read-only enumeration with no side effects, which is transparent for a zero-parameter tool. It does not mention response format, pagination, or ordering, but for a simple list operation this is a minor omission.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence: 'List all node plugins'. It contains no filler or redundant information, and 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 zero-parameter list operation, 'List all node plugins' is nearly sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. It could benefit from a note about the return payload shape, but given the trivial complexity, the description is adequately complete.
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 and the input schema already documents this completely. The description has no parameter details to add, so the baseline score of 4 is appropriate.
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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'all node plugins', which clearly expresses the operation and scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings like node_plugins_get (single plugin) and node_plugins_create/update/delete without needing to open their schemas.
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 use case is implied by 'List all node plugins' — an agent can infer that enumeration is the purpose. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this over node_plugins_get or other node_plugin tools, and no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.