wordpress_cleanup_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the cleanup targets but fails to specify whether this is a destructive operation, if it requires admin permissions, if it's reversible, or if it affects site functionality. For a tool that likely deletes data, this omission is significant and leaves the agent uncertain about risks and outcomes.

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, efficient phrase that front-loads the core action ('clean up database') and specifies targets in parentheses. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's scope without waste, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 database cleanup operation likely involving data deletion), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'clean up' entails (e.g., permanent deletion, logging, confirmation steps), potential side effects, or return values, leaving critical gaps for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately adds no parameter details, avoiding redundancy. A baseline of 4 is applied since the schema fully handles parameters, and the description doesn't introduce confusion or unnecessary information.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('clean up') and resource ('database'), and lists the types of data targeted (revisions, auto-drafts, spam, trash). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'wordpress_optimize_database' by focusing on data removal rather than performance optimization, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 like 'wordpress_optimize_database' or 'wordpress_delete_post' for specific deletions. It lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., backups), frequency, or impact on site performance, offering only a basic statement of function without usage scenarios.

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