wordpress_assign_menu_to_location

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits, but it only states the action. It fails to disclose whether the assignment overwrites existing assignments, requires specific capabilities, or validates the existence of the given location or menu ID. This lack of detail hinders an agent's ability to anticipate side effects.

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 tool's purpose. While it could benefit from additional structure (e.g., listing parameter roles), it is appropriately short for a simple operation and contains no filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description still omits critical context: what identifies a theme location, where to obtain the location value, and any side effects of reassignment. An agent cannot confidently use this tool based solely on the description, as it lacks essential operational details.

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 input schema defines two parameters (location, menuId) with only types, and the description adds no explanation of what valid values are (e.g., location slug vs. name, expected format for menuId). With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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 ('assign') and the resources involved ('menu to a theme location'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like wordpress_create_menu (creates new menus) or wordpress_get_menu_locations (retrieves locations). It is specific and 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 over alternatives, such as when creating a new menu first or retrieving existing locations. It does not mention prerequisites or how to handle cases where a menu is already assigned to a location.

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