getInstalledPlugins

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Query" implies a read-only operation and the text discloses the return contents (effects, plugins, matchNames), but it does not explicitly confirm non-destructiveness, mention permissions, pagination, or return format.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no waste, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It could be tighter given the somewhat list-like enumeration, but overall it is well-sized for a simple query 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?

For a two-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description partly compensates by naming the returned items (effects, plugins, matchNames), but it omits the read-only confirmation and any guidance on result shape or when to invoke it.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters (search, category) are fully documented with examples in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Query) and resource (installed effects, plugins, matchNames in After Effects). The word "installed" distinguishes it from applied-effect siblings like getEffectProperties and setEffectProperties, though it never names those alternatives. Clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is a discovery tool to run before applyEffect, but the description never says when to use it or when to prefer a sibling like getEffectProperties. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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