Run a site plugin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: each run is billed like an API request and listing plugins bills per result page, plus the advice to keep max_results modest.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then usage, then billing in a tight sequence with no filler. Slightly dense in the middle with the example list, but every clause (examples, list_plugins pointer, billing) carries navigational or cost value.

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?

With no output schema, the description states it returns the plugin's JSON, and it covers the two hard parts of calling this tool: discovering the plugin name/params and anticipating cost. For an open-world, enum-heavy dispatcher this is nearly complete; only a note on error or rate-limit behavior is absent.

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 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds real semantics: params must use the snake_case parameter names that list_plugins exposes, and a list value is acceptable wherever a parameter takes several. That is meaning beyond the schema's generic anyOf array definition.

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 ('Run one ScrapeUnblocker site plugin and return its JSON') and then anchors it with concrete examples (Target/Walmart search, Zillow listing search, Google Trends, App Store reviews). An agent can immediately tell this is the generic plugin executor, distinct from list_plugins, fetch_html and google_search.

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 directs the agent to 'Find the plugin and its parameters with list_plugins first', which is a real prerequisite and names the sibling. It lacks an explicit contrast against fetch_html/fetch_parsed/google_search for when a dedicated fetch or search tool is preferable, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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