Unraid API installedUnraidPlugins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a little behavioral context by specifying the scope ('installed') and the output granularity ('filenames'), but otherwise does not disclose additional behavior such as completeness, ordering, or error conditions.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, making it immediately understandable.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is complete: it states exactly what the tool returns (plugin filenames) and annotations cover the behavioral safety profile. An agent can select and invoke this tool correctly without additional context.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the schema carries no burden. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter 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 uses a specific verb (List) and a specific resource (installed Unraid OS plugin filenames), which clearly states what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from siblings like query_plugins and plugin_install_operation by emphasizing 'installed' and 'filenames'.

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 usage is implied by the description: call it when you need a list of installed plugin filenames. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or direct users to a more detailed alternative such as unraid_v4371_query_plugins for richer plugin information.

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