wordpress_delete_reusable_block

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Delete' which implies a destructive mutation, but doesn't clarify if deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or has side effects (e.g., breaking content that uses the block). The 'force' parameter hints at behavioral nuance, but the description doesn't explain it.

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, direct sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core action. Every word earns its place by conveying the essential purpose.

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 destructive tool with 2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial details about parameters, behavioral implications (e.g., irreversible deletion), and expected outcomes. For a mutation tool, this minimal description is inadequate.

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%, so the schema provides no parameter documentation. The description adds no information about the two required parameters (blockId, force). It doesn't explain what blockId refers to, what force does, or their expected formats. This leaves parameters completely undocumented.

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 'Delete a reusable block' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (reusable block) with a specific verb. It distinguishes from siblings like 'wordpress_delete_post' or 'wordpress_delete_media' by specifying the resource type, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools beyond naming the resource.

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 versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing the block ID), consequences of deletion, or when to choose this over other deletion tools like 'wordpress_bulk_delete_posts'. The description is purely functional without context.

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