dbgprobe.plugin.load

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., overwriting existing plugins), error conditions, or the outcome of loading a plugin, which is critical for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 consists of two short, focused sentences. It front-loads the primary action and then adds the prerequisite, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the plugin loading lifecycle, potential errors, or the effect on the debugger state, leaving gaps in the agent's understanding.

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 covers the 'path' parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, and schema description coverage is 100%, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states the action ('Load'), the resource ('a new plugin'), and the source ('from a file or directory path'). It also mentions a necessary environment variable, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 mentions a prerequisite (DBGPROBE_MCP_PLUGINS env var) but does not differentiate from sibling tools like dbgprobe.plugin.list or dbgprobe.plugin.reload, leaving the agent without guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives.

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