scaffold_plugin_integration

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool generates a scaffold, but does not indicate whether it overwrites existing files, requires permissions, or has any side effects. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose (generate scaffold) and key details (folder structure + boilerplate). No wasted words.

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 simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage context and does not explain what happens if the plugin already exists. The presence of a similar sibling tool also suggests a need for more differentiation.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. 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 generates a Lampa plugin scaffold with folder structure and main.js boilerplate. It uses specific verb 'Generate' and resource 'Lampa plugin scaffold'. However, there is a sibling tool 'generate_plugin_boilerplate' which may overlap, but this description differentiates by emphasizing 'folder structure + main.js' and 'integration'.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when it is appropriate, or what distinguishes it from siblings like 'generate_plugin_boilerplate'.

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