IvedaAI: Plugin

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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as the response envelope with 'status', 'truncated', and 'timedOut' flags, and specifics about file upload format and required form fields. It aligns with the destructiveHint annotation (DELETE operation) and adds meaningful detail about API behavior.

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 well-structured with a brief overview and then a clean per-endpoint breakdown. It is dense but efficient, containing no filler while packing all essential parameter details for each operation.

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 four distinct operations, no output schema, and a generic input schema, the description does a strong job of covering operations, parameters, and response flags. It could be more complete by describing the response body shape for each operation or mentioning error behavior, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

Even though the input schema is generic, the description fully compensates by mapping each operation to its concrete parameters: query parameters for GET, file and form fields for POST, path parameter for DELETE/PATCH, and body reference to VoPlugin. This is far more informative than the schema alone.

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 clearly identifies this as the tool for Plugin operations and enumerates the exact operations (List, Import, Delete, Update metadata) with HTTP verbs and resources. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools, which are for other IvedaAI resources.

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 clear endpoint context and operation details, making the intended use implicit: use this tool when performing CRUD actions on plugins. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions, so it falls short of explicit usage guidance.

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