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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: discloses that views are excluded, that InnoDB row counts are estimates, that multisite non-super-admins see only the current site's tables, that manage_options is required, that it only runs with write access enabled, and that AlphaBridge forwards to one site.

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?

Front-loads the return shape, then constraints, in one dense run-on sentence chain. Every clause carries information, but the packing into a single semicolon-laden sentence slightly hurts scannability.

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 no output schema, the description fully compensates by naming the returned fields (name, rows, size, prefix) and covering limits (views excluded, multisite scoping, auth). An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description spends its space on return fields and constraints rather than parameter meaning, which is appropriate for a zero-argument call.

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 and resource ('List the base tables of this site's database') and enumerates exactly what each entry carries (name, row count estimate, size, prefix). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling wp_db_schema, which returns columns rather than the table list.

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?

Routes the agent to wp_db_schema for column-level detail, establishing when to pick this tool versus that one. It lacks an explicit 'do not use for X' exclusion, but the division of labor is clear enough for correct selection.

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