List Editor Plugins

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by stating the tool lists rather than modifies, and that MCP does not edit [editor_plugins]. This adds useful behavioral context about why the tool is safe and why plugins won't be auto-enabled.

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?

Three concise sentences: what it does, when to use it, and why it does not modify editor plugins. The most important information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

With readOnlyHint present, an output schema present, and the single optional parameter fully documented in the schema, the description covers purpose, timing, and rationale. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 already fully documents the only parameter, project_path, as 'Optional project root'. The description adds no further parameter-level semantics, but the schema coverage is high, so the baseline of 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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: it lists addon folders with plugin.cfg and which editor plugins are enabled in project.godot. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like godot_get_project_settings or godot_list_autoload.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool: after the user enables plugins in the editor, to verify before continuing. It also names the companion tool godot_get_project_settings, but it does not explicitly describe when not to use it or compare it against alternatives.

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