hosting_deployWordpressPlugin

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions uploading and triggering deployment but does not disclose crucial behaviors such as whether it overwrites existing plugins, if it activates the plugin, what happens on failure, or if it requires specific server configurations. For a deployment tool, these details are essential for safe use.

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 two sentences front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff. It is succinct and directly addresses the tool's purpose.

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?

The description lacks completeness. It does not mention what the tool returns (no output schema), prerequisites (e.g., plugin directory must be accessible), or error handling. It also does not clarify if the deployment is synchronous or asynchronous. Given the complexity of deployment and the presence of sibling deploy tools, more context is needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. While the schema describes 'pluginPath' as a path, the description could have clarified local vs server path, but it does not. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides adequate semantics.

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 ('Deploy a WordPress plugin') and the resource ('from a directory to a hosting server'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like hosting_deployWordpressTheme (deploy theme) and hosting_deployJsApplication (deploy JS app) by specifying 'plugin'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only describes the action; usage context such as prerequisites (e.g., WordPress installation) or when not to deploy is missing. The tool name and sibling list imply its use for plugins, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is given.

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