wp_list_plugins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List all installed plugins' implies a read operation but never confirms it is non-destructive, says nothing about the return shape, or notes whether status filtering affects scope — a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single efficient sentence with zero waste and the core purpose front-loaded. It is arguably too terse rather than padded, so there is no structural bloat to penalize.

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?

This is a simple list tool with no output schema, so return-format explanation is not strictly required. Still, with no annotations and no mention of scope (all plugins vs. filtered), the description leaves behavioral context thin for an agent deciding how to call it.

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%, so both the required 'site' (with a pointer to list_sites) and the 'status' enum are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing beyond this, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (installed plugins), making the operation unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like wp_get_plugin, mcp_search_plugins, or mcp_get_plugins_health, so the agent must infer the boundary from the name alone.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as wp_get_plugin (single plugin) or mcp_search_plugins (find plugins in the repo). No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.

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