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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing the exact response fields, the UTC basis of user_registered, the meaning of extra_caps, and the important privacy constraint that emails and usernames are withheld. 'Runs straight away' adds that no confirmation step is needed, though rate limits or error behavior are not covered.

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 the verb and resource, then the return fields, then the privacy caveat. The parenthetical '(site: demo.royalplugins.com)' largely duplicates the site_id enum description and is the one phrase that does not earn its place.

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 carries the burden of describing the return payload, and it does so field by field including the notable omissions. Only the absence of guidance on resolving an ID keeps it short of full completeness.

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 50%: site_id is documented in the schema, while id is a bare required integer. The description's 'by ID' confirms id refers to a user identifier, which is a small but real addition; nothing is said about site_id beyond the schema's own enum note.

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 ('Get one user by ID') and immediately enumerates the returned fields, which cleanly separates it from the sibling list tool wp_get_users. The singular 'one user by ID' makes the granularity unambiguous.

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 'by ID' phrasing implies this is the lookup path once an ID is known, but the description never says when to prefer it over wp_get_users or how to obtain an ID in the first place. Usage is inferable rather than stated, and no exclusion criteria are given.

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