hosting_listInstalledWordPressPluginsV1

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 discloses that the response includes status, updates, and vulnerabilities, which is good. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, or potential side effects.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence is necessary and informative without redundancy.

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 lack of output schema, the description gives a reasonable overview of what the response includes (status, updates, vulnerabilities). It does not mention pagination or ordering, but for a list tool with a straightforward purpose, it is fairly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining where to get the 'software' identifier, but does not elaborate on 'username' or 'category' beyond what the schema provides. The added context is marginal.

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 (list plugins), the resource (WordPress installation), and the scope (installed plugins). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'listAvailableWordPressPlugins' and 'listInstalledWordPressThemes' by specifying 'installed' and including 'status, available updates and known vulnerabilities'.

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 how to obtain the required 'software' identifier from another endpoint. While it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use the tool, the context is clear and the instruction is helpful.

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