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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'its server marks it read-only, so it runs straight away' largely restates structured data. It does add a small amount of return-content context ('basic information'), but does not say what fields that includes or whether results are paginated.

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-loaded purpose is good, but sentences 1 and 2 overlap, and the trailing 'Through Royally: its server marks it read-only...' is awkwardly phrased and redundant with the annotations.

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?

A simple, non-destructive, no-parameter list tool, so the burden is low. Still, with no output schema the vague phrase 'basic information' leaves the agent unsure what each ability record contains before deciding to call get_ability_info.

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?

One optional parameter with a single-value enum and 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents site_id. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline for full coverage.

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 ('Discover all available WordPress abilities') and says it returns the registered abilities, so the agent knows the operation. However, it never distinguishes itself from near-identical siblings such as mcp-adapter-default__mcp-adapter-discover-abilities or royal-mcp__discover_tools, which an agent in this fleet would need.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no routing to alternatives like get_ability_info or execute_ability. Discovery-before-execution is only weakly implied by 'Returns a list of all registered abilities'.

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