wordpress_activate_theme

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the selected theme becomes the active theme, implying the previous theme is no longer active. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., whether the old theme remains installed), potential failure conditions, or permission requirements. The core behavior is clear, but additional context is absent.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the purpose. Every word contributes meaning, with no unnecessary filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the operation.

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 one-parameter tool, the description covers the action's essence, but it does not address the meaning of 'stylesheet' or the expected outcome in terms of site state. Given the lack of output schema and annotations, a bit more context (e.g., how to identify the theme) would make it complete. It is a minimum viable description.

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 has zero description coverage for the required 'stylesheet' parameter, and the tool description does not explain what 'stylesheet' means or how to obtain it. The parameter name is technical and may be unclear to users unfamiliar with WordPress theme internals. The description adds no value beyond the raw schema.

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 action ('Activate a theme') and explicitly clarifies the consequence ('switch to it as the active theme'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like get_themes, delete_theme, or create_child_theme by making the activation intent 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., theme must be installed), nor does it suggest checking current active theme first with get_active_theme. The description is purely a statement of function and offers no contextual usage advice.

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