wordpress_deactivate_plugin

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. It merely restates the action without explaining side effects, required permissions, reversibility, or what happens to the plugin after deactivation.

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 with no unnecessary words, but it is under-specified. While brevity is positive, it comes at the cost of providing meaningful detail beyond the tool name.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and one undocumented parameter, the description is inadequate. It lacks prerequisites, parameter format details, and any explanation of effects, making the tool difficult to use correctly in context.

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 one required parameter 'plugin' (string) with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain what value to pass (e.g., plugin slug, file path, display name), leaving the agent without enough information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 'Deactivate a plugin' clearly states the action (deactivate) and resource (plugin). It is specific but essentially restates the tool name without differentiating it from siblings like activate_plugin or delete_plugin, though the meaning is 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or alternatives. It only states the basic action with no context about prerequisites or relation to other plugin management tools.

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