Search the plugin repository

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: it calls an external service (WordPress.org) and discloses the specific return fields (slug, rating, install count, last-updated, compatibility). This helps the agent set expectations without contradicting 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?

The description is two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and the external-scope clarification in the second. Every sentence earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description is sufficient for a low-complexity search tool: it states the purpose, the external source, and the exact return fields. Combined with full param schema and safety annotations, nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, with each parameter (search, page, per_page) already having a clear description and defaults. The tool description adds no further parameter-level detail (e.g., case sensitivity, wildcard support), so it does not go beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full coverage.

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 specifies the verb 'Search' and the resource 'public WordPress.org plugin repository', and explicitly contrasts it with 'your site', distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_plugins and get_plugin. This gives an agent a clear, unambiguous sense of what the tool does.

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 context—'queries WordPress.org, not your site'—which implies when to use this tool (when searching the external repository) versus site-local tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full explicit guidance.

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