Update plugin

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

Annotations provide only negative hints (readOnlyHint=false, etc.), so the description carries the burden. It adds useful context like 'opaque plugin state' and the various operations, but it does not disclose side effects such as whether existing parameters are overwritten or whether a plugin must already exist. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence efficiently lists all main operations with no filler words. The description is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no positive annotations, the description provides a good overview but omits important operational details such as required identification (trackId/pluginId), update semantics, and expected response. It is better than a bare definition but not fully complete for a mutation 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does map 'rename' to name, 'change parameters' to parameters, 'store opaque plugin state' to state, and 'enable/bypass' to enabled. However, it does not explain trackId/pluginId or clarify the relationship between 'bypass' and the boolean enabled, leaving some parameters without meaningful context.

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 enumerates specific actions ('Enable, bypass, rename, change parameters, or store opaque plugin state') on a defined resource ('a plugin slot'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_plugin (added) and update_effect (effects).

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 implies usage for updating an existing plugin slot, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_plugin or remove_plugin. No exclusions or alternative guidance are provided.

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