grafana_listar_plugins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing beyond the name. It does not state the read-only nature explicitly, permission requirements (plugin listing often needs admin), whether disabled plugins are included, or pagination/return shape.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no filler. The leading '28.' is an artifact of a numbered list and slightly delays the front-loaded verb, keeping it from a 5.

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 tool with an output schema, the description covers the essentials of what is returned. However, with no annotations it omits permission/scope context an agent might need before invoking in a restricted environment.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The parenthetical does clarify what kinds of plugin entries are returned, adding mild value.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Listar plugins instalados no Grafana') with a parenthetical that scopes what counts as a plugin (datasources, apps, painéis). It is distinguishable from siblings like grafana_listar_fontes_dados, though the relationship to grafana_verificar_compatibilidade_plugin is not addressed.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives such as grafana_listar_fontes_dados (which also enumerates datasources) or grafana_verificar_compatibilidade_plugin. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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