wordpress_create_userCreate a new WordPress user by providing username, email, and password, and assign roles to control site access.
Create a new WordPress user with roles
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | Yes | ||
| Yes | |||
| password | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Input schema / $schemaAdded value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that it creates a user, but not whether it requires admin privileges, what happens with duplicate usernames/emails, how the password is processed, or what the response contains. The vague 'with roles' raises more questions than it answers.
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?
Single sentence, no wasted words, but it sacrifices essential information. It is minimally acceptable in size, yet the omission of role-related details means it is not fully effective.
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 a simple 3-parameter create tool, the description lacks any info on return value, error conditions, authentication, or how roles (mentioned) are actually assigned. Sibling tools like wordpress_assign_role exist, so the relationship should be clarified. Incomplete for a mutation tool with no annotations or output schema.
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 has no descriptions, and the description does not clarify the meaning or constraints of username/email/password. It introduces 'roles' as a concept that is not present in the schema, possibly misleading. With 0% schema coverage, this is a critical gap.
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?
Clearly states a specific action (create) and resource (WordPress user). Distinguishes from siblings like update_user/delete_user. However, 'with roles' suggests role assignment within this tool, which is not reflected in the schema, creating slight ambiguity.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention that role assignment may be handled by wordpress_assign_role, nor any prerequisites like existing authentication. The description only states the action itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.