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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it discloses that password hash and activation key are never returned, that full edit-context is always requested, and that insufficient capability produces a 403 rather than a silently truncated payload. The permission-failure semantics are exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs before calling.

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 with purpose and the key calling shortcut, then the return contract, then permission behavior. The field enumeration is long but each item earns its place as substitute documentation for a missing output schema; only the closing 'Through Royally' sentence feels like transport noise.

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 specifies the returned field set, including type hints (array, boolean, ISO 8601, UTC format) and the explicitly excluded sensitive fields. Combined with the permission model, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents both parameters, including 'Use 0 to get the current user,' which the description largely restates. The description adds no format or constraint detail for site_id, so it earns the baseline rather than extra credit.

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 ('Gets a WordPress user by ID') and immediately distinguishes the two calling modes via user_id = 0 for the authenticated user. An agent can separate this from wp_list_users or wp_get_user_meta without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent how to fetch the current user versus a specific user, and explains the capability precondition that leads to a 403. It does not name sibling alternatives such as wp_list_users for enumeration, so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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