plugin_deep_dive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool analyzes files, Lampa API usage, event hooks, settings, CSS, and entry-point preview, implying a read-only, non-destructive operation. It does not mention performance implications or output format, but the stated scope is transparent for an analysis tool.

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 that efficiently conveys the tool's complete purpose and scope, front-loading key information. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or wasted space.

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 covers the tool's scope comprehensively given the single parameter and no output schema. It lists what the analysis covers, but does not specify the return format or structure. For a tool with no output schema, this is adequate but could be slightly more explicit about what the agent receives.

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?

There is only one parameter 'plugin' with a description in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds context about what the plugin folder name represents, but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool performs a 'Comprehensive single-call analysis of a Lampa plugin folder' and lists specific analysis categories (files, API usage, event hooks, etc.). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting it 'replaces 6–10 individual tool calls', providing strong differentiation.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool (for a comprehensive analysis in one call) and implies efficiency gain over multiple individual calls. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for partial analysis, but the context is sufficient for guidance.

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