Hot-reload a plugin

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

Annotations indicate the tool is not read-only and is idempotent. The description adds the development context, implying that reloading refreshes code changes without persisting data. It discloses the intended use without contradicting 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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and context. Every word adds value, with no unnecessary information.

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 tool is a straightforward reload action with no output schema and two parameters, the description is minimal yet functional. However, it omits details like prerequisites (e.g., plugin must be enabled) or side effects (e.g., disrupts current behavior), which a developer might find useful.

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 two parameters: 'vault' (documented) and 'id' (only minLength, no description). The description does not mention either parameter, so it fails to compensate for the 50% schema coverage. The agent gets no additional guidance on parameter meaning beyond the schema's sparse documentation.

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 the action ('reloads') and the resource ('a plugin's code'), and adds context ('useful during plugin development'). It distinguishes well from sibling tools like obsidian_enable_plugin and obsidian_disable_plugin, which are about toggling plugin state rather than code reloading.

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 mentions 'useful during plugin development,' giving clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or suggest alternatives, leaving room for slight ambiguity.

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