Delete a plugin

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

The annotations already mark destructiveHint=true. The description adds that it is a DELETE operation, confirming destruction, but does not elaborate on consequences (e.g., irreversibility, impact on related data). No contradiction with 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?

The description is very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main action. The technical details are concise, though the second sentence adds minimal value for an agent.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be explained, but the description lacks important context such as prerequisites (e.g., plugin must exist, user must have board authorization) and typical use cases.

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 description does not mention any parameters. The input schema has two parameters (path with pluginId, optional body), and schema coverage is 50%. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Delete a plugin' which is a specific verb+resource. It matches the tool's name and title and conveys the main action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools that also operate on plugins.

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 technical details (HTTP method, path, authorization class) but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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