wordpress_get_plugins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, it does not specify aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or the format of the returned data (e.g., list of plugin names vs. detailed objects). This leaves significant gaps for safe and effective use.

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, clear sentence: 'Get all installed WordPress plugins'. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with zero wasted words, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but lacks completeness. It does not address behavioral traits like data format or error conditions, which are important for a read operation. However, for a basic list tool, it meets the minimum viable threshold without critical omissions.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate here. A baseline of 4 is given since the schema fully covers the lack of parameters, and the description does not introduce unnecessary complexity.

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 'Get all installed WordPress plugins' clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'installed WordPress plugins', making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'wordpress_get_active_plugins' or 'wordpress_get_plugins_detailed', which could cause confusion about scope or detail level.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'wordpress_get_active_plugins' (which likely lists only active plugins) and 'wordpress_get_plugins_detailed' (which may provide more detailed information), the agent lacks explicit direction on choosing this tool for retrieving all installed plugins, including inactive ones.

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