catalog_discover

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It states the tool does not load plugins, which is a useful non-destructive trait, but it does not mention permissions, side effects, or what happens if loading occurs later. Minimal but not misleading.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action and a next step. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could include parameter guidance without sacrificing 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 four parameters, one required, and no output schema, the description lacks parameter explanations, usage guidance, and return details. It is insufficient for an agent to correctly call this tool, especially given the 0% schema coverage.

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 0%: the description does not explain any of the four parameters (format, limit, offset, search_path) despite one being required and having an enum. The description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, failing to help an agent understand parameter usage.

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) and resource (plugin candidate locations) and adds a key qualifier (without loading them). It is specific and distinguishes from loading operations, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools for comparison.

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 gives only an implied sequence with 'Scan individual candidates next,' but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like catalog_scan or catalog_search. There is no when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria.

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