wordpress_assign_role

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Assign role to user' implies a mutation operation, but the description doesn't disclose any behavioral traits: it doesn't mention permissions required, whether changes are reversible, potential side effects (e.g., affecting user capabilities), error conditions, or what the response looks like. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 with just three words, making it front-loaded and efficient. There's no wasted verbiage or unnecessary elaboration, though this brevity contributes to its inadequacy in other dimensions. Every word serves the core purpose, earning 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?

Given the tool's complexity (a mutation operation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't provide necessary context such as behavioral details, parameter meanings, usage guidelines, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and use the tool correctly.

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%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for the two parameters (userId and role). The description 'Assign role to user' doesn't add any meaningful semantics about these parameters: it doesn't explain what userId refers to (e.g., WordPress user ID), what valid roles are (e.g., 'administrator', 'editor'), or formatting requirements. This fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.

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 'Assign role to user' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'wordpress_assign_role'. It specifies the verb 'assign' and resource 'role to user', but lacks specificity about what system (WordPress) or context this operates in, and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'wordpress_create_role' or 'wordpress_update_user' that might handle related functionality.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., existing user and role), exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools such as 'wordpress_create_role' (for creating roles) or 'wordpress_update_user' (which might also modify user properties). This leaves the agent with no context for tool selection.

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