wp_get

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'WordPress instance details' and never states that the tool is read-only, what it returns, what happens if the location does not exist, or whether any side effects occur.

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 short and front-loaded with a meaningful phrase, but the 'Args:' block redundantly repeats the schema. It is not bloated, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description still lacks essential context: how to identify a valid location_id, whether wp_get is the right tool compared to wp_locations or wp_install, and what behavior to expect. It is minimally usable but not sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description merely restates 'location_id: Location id', which adds no meaning beyond the schema's own title. It does not explain what a location_id is, how to obtain one, or what format it should take.

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 phrase 'WordPress instance details' identifies the resource and implies a retrieval operation, matching the wp_get name. It does not explicitly say 'get' or contrast itself with sibling tools, but 'details' clearly distinguishes it from wp_install and wp_delete.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that location_id likely comes from wp_locations, nor does it explain any prerequisite or exclusion.

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