serial.plugin.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the env var requirement, that the tool returns metadata including hints, enabled status, and policy. It implies a read-only operation without side effects, though not explicitly stated.

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 three sentences, each earning its place. The first sentence states the main purpose, the second adds crucial detail about metadata, and the third gives actionable usage guidance. No waste.

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?

For a listing tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (tool names, metadata, enabled status, policy) and the prerequisite env var. It is complete for an agent to understand and use this 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 has zero parameters, so no parameter explanation is needed. The baseline is 4, and the description adds context about what the tool returns and its dependencies, but not about parameters since there are none.

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 lists loaded plugins with tool names and metadata. It distinguishes from sibling tools like serial.plugin.load or serial.plugin.reload because it is a list operation, not a modification or template.

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 explicit guidance on requiring the SERIAL_MCP_PLUGINS env var and what to tell the user if plugins are disabled. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the context of sibling tools implies when to use other plugin management tools.

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