VNyan installed plugins

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description clearly indicates the tool is read-only ('Read-only inventory') and explains that installing a plugin DLL remains a user action, implying it does not modify the system. This is sufficient behavioral disclosure for a simple list operation. It does not discuss edge cases like no assemblies found, but that is not critical.

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 two sentences, each providing essential information: the action (lists DLLs) and the read-only nature. There is no redundancy or extraneous text. It is appropriately sized for a parameterless tool.

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 absence of an output schema, the description partially explains the return value (lists DLLs and metadata), but does not specify the format or structure of the output. It is adequate for a simple inventory tool but could be more complete by mentioning that it returns an array of plugin objects or a list of names. Considering the low complexity, it meets a minimal baseline.

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 input schema has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not add any parameter semantics because there are none. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate; there is no missing information.

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 it lists DLLs in the Assemblies directory and reads metadata from IVNyanPluginManifest if present. The verb 'lists' and resource 'DLLs' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools that deal with other VNyan components (e.g., graphs, effects) by explicitly calling it a plugin inventory. However, it does not explicitly contrast with similar listing tools like vnyan_graph_list.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies it is for viewing installed plugins, but does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for related tasks like searching or filtering. There are no usage conditions or prerequisites stated.

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