Delete a plugin

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

Beyond the annotation destructiveHint=true, the description adds critical behavioral details: files are removed permanently, many plugins drop database tables on uninstall, and confirm: true is mandatory. This goes beyond the schema's 'required' array, which only lists plugin as required, so it clarifies an essential safety control. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the two additional sentences pack the essential preconditions and consequences. Every sentence earns its place.

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 destructive delete operation, the description covers the necessary prerequisites (inactive plugin), the required flag (confirm), and the irreversible consequences (permanent file removal and potential database drops). Given the schema fully documents param formats and the high annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs to safely call this tool is missing.

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 schema already covers all parameters with descriptions at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by explicitly stating that confirm must be true, which is not listed as required in the schema's required array. This is a crucial semantic clarification that prevents an agent from assuming confirm is optional.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Delete an installed plugin from the server.' The verb 'delete' plus the explicit resource 'plugin' makes the purpose unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from other delete tools by naming the resource type, so an agent can immediately identify the target.

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 usage context: the plugin must be inactive first, and confirm must be true. This implies a prerequisite (deactivation) and a hard requirement, which helps the agent execute correctly. It does not explicitly cite alternatives like deactivate_plugin, but the instruction 'must be inactive first' effectively signals that deactivation is a separate action, leaving only a minor gap in explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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