find_plugins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only the word 'Catalogued', leaving unstated whether an unscanned catalog yields empty results, whether matching is exact or substring, or how many results come back.

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?

A single dense sentence with the filtering dimensions front-loaded and no filler. The role list is long but earns its place because the schema carries no enum for it.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the parameter meaning is largely recoverable from the description. What is missing given the crowded plugin-related sibling set is any positioning against list_plugins and scan_plugin_catalog.

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%, so the description must carry the load, and it does partly by listing the accepted role values (eq, compressor, limiter, deesser, gate, multiband, reverb, delay, saturation, modulation, mastering, pitch, piano, strings, drums, bass, synth) and indicating query matches name/vendor. It does not clarify that these are the literal accepted strings or whether matching is partial.

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 action (find) on a specific resource (catalogued plug-ins) and enumerates the role categories it accepts. It is not explicitly differentiated from the close sibling list_plugins, which prevents 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 description implies usage by describing the filtering dimensions (role, name/vendor), which hints when this tool fits. It never states when to prefer it over list_plugins, scan_plugin_catalog, search_browser, or get_plugin_profile, and gives no prerequisite such as whether the catalog must be scanned first.

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