Get plugin data by key (URL-keyed bridge)

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

The description claims it's a 'Get' operation, but annotations set readOnlyHint=false, creating a contradiction (annotation_contradiction=true). The description does not explain side effects, idempotency, or authorization beyond a cryptic 'Authorization class: board'.

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 terse (22 words), but under-specification makes it nearly useless. It sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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?

Despite having an output schema and nested parameters, the description provides no information about response format, the purpose of body.params or companyId, or how the tool fits into the broader workflow.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain any of the 2 parameters (path, body). It only repeats the endpoint structure, adding no semantic value over 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 title and description clearly state 'Get plugin data by key (URL-keyed bridge)' and provide the endpoint path, making the retrieval purpose evident. It distinguishes from sibling 'pc_post_plugins_by_plugin_id_bridge_data' by focusing on key-specific data.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'pc_post_plugins_by_plugin_id_bridge_data'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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