get_plugin_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It reveals the return contents (API, parameters, examples, version history) and implies a read-only operation. It does not mention error behavior or latency, but for a simple retrieval tool the disclosure 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, immediately stating purpose and prerequisite. No superfluous words; efficiently structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given no output schema, the description lists what the documentation includes, compensating for missing structure. It also covers the prerequisite. It could mention response format (text, JSON) but is otherwise complete for a simple retrieval tool.

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 input schema already describes the parameter as the plugin ID from list_plugins (100% coverage). The description reinforces this by naming list_plugins, adding context beyond the schema's field description. The only parameter is fully explained.

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 states the tool gets detailed documentation of a specified plugin, listing exact content (API, params, examples, version history). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_code_example or search_api.

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 explicitly tells the user to first use list_plugins to obtain the plugin_id, providing clear prerequisite guidance. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the instruction is sufficient for correct invocation.

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