Retrieve a plugin

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, repeatable read. The description adds only the underlying REST operation (GET /plugins/{id}) and the API tag, which is useful provenance but no behavioral trait beyond the annotations.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the essential action in the first two lines. The opening line duplicates the tool title verbatim, and the trailing "Immich operation / tag" line is metadata rather than guidance, so it is efficient but slightly padded.

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 one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is sufficient to invoke it correctly. It would be complete with a brief note on what a plugin object contains or how it differs from the plugin-search siblings.

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 100% for the single id parameter (format: uuid), so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing beyond "by its ID"; baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Retrieve information about a specific plugin by its ID"), so an agent can tell it fetches one plugin rather than listing them. However, it never names or contrasts with the obvious siblings immich_search_plugins / immich_search_plugin_methods, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing guidance. "By its ID" hints that a known plugin ID is required, but that is a restatement of the schema, not usage guidance.

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