plugin_show_editor

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals only the toggle behavior for None and the show/hide effect, but does not mention side effects, what happens when the target plugin is invalid, whether the window becomes focused, or what the function returns.

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 concise sentence with no filler, and the action is front-loaded. However, it sacrifices important parameter context for brevity.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse to support correct invocation. It does not explain how `index`, `slot`, and `location` combine to identify which plugin editor window should be shown or hidden, which is essential given the four-parameter schema.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description only clarifies the `show` parameter's None case. The required `index`, plus `slot` and `location`, are entirely unexplained, leaving the agent without enough meaning to select targets correctly.

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 identifies the action ('Show/hide') and the resource ('plugin editor window'), and adds the useful behavioral detail that None toggles. It does not explicitly distinguish this from related window-control siblings like ui_show_window or ui_hide_window, but the plugin-editor scope is reasonably specific.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over alternatives, whether the plugin must already be valid/loaded, or how it relates to ui_show_window/ui_hide_window. The description implies the basic use case but offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or sibling differentiation.

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