paperclip_list_plugin_examples

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

Description adds value beyond readOnlyHint annotation by specifying authentication errors (401, 403) and the board-only restriction (requiring human-user API key). It also outlines the return structure.

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 well-structured with clear sections (warning, args, returns, examples, error handling). It is concise with no redundant sentences.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully specifies the return type (array of descriptors with fields) and covers error handling. The tool is a simple list operation, and the description is complete.

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 single parameter response_format is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description repeats this information without adding meaningful extra semantics, so 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 explicitly states the verb 'list', the resource 'example plugins', and the purpose 'for reference'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool paperclip_list_plugins by noting 'available...that can be installed' vs. installed plugins.

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?

Clear guidance is provided with explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' sections, including a recommendation for the alternative (paperclip_list_plugins). Also includes a board-only requirement warning.

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