List Widget Areas (Sidebars)

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, and the description adds the critical 'Requires admin' requirement and the return shape. These details go beyond the structured hints and provide useful operational context.

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 extremely concise: two sentences and a return type line. Every element adds value, and it is well-structured with a clear breakdown of the response.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, how it identifies items, the endpoint, auth requirements, and the return structure. It could mention pagination or error handling, but these are unlikely for a read-only core endpoint.

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 schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter (response_format) is fully described with an enum and default. The description does not need to add further parameter details, so it meets the baseline without extra value.

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 all registered widget areas/sidebars with their IDs and widgets, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_get_widgets. It also names the core REST endpoint for additional precision.

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 gives clear context: it lists all sidebars and notes that admin access is required. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the scope is unambiguous and the tool's purpose is obvious from the description and title.

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