plugin_repo.check_updates

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The one-line description does not state whether the tool is read-only, modifies state, requires network access, or what the output looks like. The parameter 'perform' is not explained, so the agent cannot know if calling it with different values has side effects. This is a critical gap for a tool that may invoke updates.

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 short (5 words), but it is not concise in a helpful way—it omits essential information. Conciseness should mean every sentence earns its place, but here the single sentence is insufficient. The description could be expanded to include purpose, parameter guidance, and side effects without being verbose.

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 the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the return value, whether the tool is safe to call repeatedly, or how it relates to the plugin repository workflow. The agent cannot reliably use this tool based on the current definition.

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 does not mention the single parameter 'perform' or its meaning. The schema provides only a type (boolean) with no description, so the agent has no way to understand what 'perform' controls (e.g., whether it triggers an actual update or just checks). The description fails to add any value beyond the schema.

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 'Check plugin repository updates' is vague. The verb 'check' is ambiguous—it could mean querying status, fetching available updates, or performing an update. The name implies a check, but the parameter 'perform' suggests a possible action, which is not clarified. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'plugin_repo.status' or 'plugin_repo.plugin_action', which may overlap.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The sibling tools 'plugin_repo.status' and 'plugin_repo.plugin_action' are not referenced, leaving the agent to infer the correct context.

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