wp_list_plugins

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states 'read-only', indicating no destructive actions, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose other aspects like return format, pagination, or potential errors. This is adequate but not rich.

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 sentence of three words, front-loading the verb and resource. Every word earns its place with no waste.

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?

The description is minimal and does not detail what the returned data contains (e.g., plugin names, versions). Without an output schema, the agent may be uncertain about the response structure. For a simple listing tool, this is a noticeable gap, though the intent is clear.

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 schema coverage is 100% (trivially). Per guidelines, baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter semantics, but none are needed.

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 resource 'installed WordPress plugins', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that create, update, or delete other resources like pages or posts. The 'read-only' qualifier further clarifies its purpose.

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 the tool is for listing plugins and is safe (read-only). While it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives, the sibling tools are mostly for other actions or resources, making it clear this is the go-to for plugin listing. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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