List C4D Plugins (Any Type)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description assumes full burden. It describes the output structure (plugin and plugin_file fields) but does not mention side effects, error behavior, or performance considerations. Transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, then details. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a good level of completeness by explaining the output structure and filtering options. Minor gaps remain (e.g., whether all or only installed plugins are listed, sorting behavior), but it is largely sufficient for a plugin enumeration 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 already has 100% description coverage for parameters, but the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining what 'plugin' and 'plugin_file' represent and how plugin_pattern works. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 'Generalized plugin enumerator' and specifies it can list plugins of any type by passing a plugin_type string alias or integer. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'call_command' and others that are not plugin enumerators.

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 explains how to use plugin_type, name_pattern, and plugin_pattern for filtering, giving clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but among sibling tools there is no alternative plugin enumerator, so the guidance is adequate.

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