get_plugins_with_backup

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states it 'returns' plugins with backupVersion. It omits any behavioral traits like authentication needs, side effects, or rate limits. Read-only operation is implied but not confirmed.

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 extremely concise with three short sections: purpose, parameter, return. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded. 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 a simple tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essentials. However, it could briefly mention that results are a subset of all plugins.

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 has 0% coverage for the depth parameter. The description adds a brief explanation: 'The depth of the information to retrieve.' This adds some meaning but remains vague about what depth entails.

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 retrieves plugins with a backupVersion for downgrade, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_all_plugins or get_plugins_with_updates.

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 downgrade scenarios but does not explicitly state when to use or provide alternatives. No 'when-not' or exclusions.

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