Get repository plugin info

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. The description adds the context that the tool retrieves data from the WordPress.org repository, implying an external read operation, but doesn't disclose further behavior like rate limits or error handling. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and resource, and the second sentence provides the usage context. No unnecessary words.

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 read-only lookup with one required and one optional parameter, the description covers the purpose, usage, and the type of information returned. It doesn't explain error handling or output format, but given the simplicity and annotation coverage, it is sufficient. A more detailed description would not add significant value.

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 description coverage is 100%, both parameters have meaningful descriptions. The tool description does not add extra parameter-level detail beyond mentioning the types of info returned, which relates to the response rather than inputs. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'one plugin from the WordPress.org repository', and lists the specific types of info (description, changelog, version history, ratings, compatibility). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_plugin, which likely targets installed plugins, and search_plugins, which searches multiple.

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 an explicit use case: 'Use before installing or updating to see what changed.' This tells the agent when to invoke this tool, though it doesn't name alternative tools for other scenarios (e.g., get_plugin for installed plugin info). It's clear but could be more explicit about alternatives.

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