list_external_plugins

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses case-insensitive search, result limiting, and the cache/refresh behavior. It does not elaborate on what 'discovered' means or potential side effects of forced rescans, but the core behavior is transparent enough.

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 concise and well-structured: a single purpose sentence followed by a compact parameter list. No filler or redundant information is present.

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?

The output schema covers return-value structure, and the description covers purpose, filtering, result limiting, and cache behavior. The only notable gap is lack of guidance on when to select this tool over sibling browser/plugin tools, but for a simple list operation the description is largely complete.

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 0%, so the parameter descriptions in the tool description are essential. All three parameters are explained with meaningful semantics: query's case-insensitivity, max_results' display limit, and refresh_cache's forced rescan behavior.

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 tool lists discovered external plugins (VST/AU) with optional name filtering. This specific verb+resource+scope differentiates it from siblings like load_external_plugin and the browser-navigation tools.

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 implies this is for browsing/or discovering available plugins before loading one, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as get_browser_tree or get_browser_items_at_path. There are no exclusions or comparison guidance.

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