List C4D Plugins (Any Type)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden and does a solid job by explaining the output entry shape (plugin parent folder and plugin_file basename) and the regex filtering behavior. It doesn't explicitly state that enumeration is side-effect-free or describe error behavior, but the enumerator framing makes the behavior predictable.

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?

Three focused sentences with no wasted words. The lead sentence states the tool's purpose, and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct functional detail about input, output, and filtering.

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 simple enumerator with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete: it covers input modes, output entry fields, and filter behavior. Minor gaps such as result ordering and behavior for unknown plugin_type are unlikely to block 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful value by clarifying plugin_pattern semantics (matched against folder/binary and useful when the command display name lacks the plugin brand) and by explaining the plugin/plugin_file output attribution.

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 a generalized C4D plugin enumerator covering any plugin type, with concrete examples such as material, shader, video_post, and command. This distinguishes it from sibling list_* tools that target documents, layers, tracks, or graph nodes.

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 gives clear context: pass plugin_type to enumerate plugins, and optionally narrow results with name_pattern and plugin_pattern. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool appears to be a direct plugin-listing alternative, so the usage context is sufficiently clear.

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