wordpress_delete_theme

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 mentions a constraint about active themes, which is useful, but fails to cover critical aspects like required permissions, whether deletion is permanent, error handling, or what happens to child themes. For a destructive operation, this is insufficient.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action ('Delete a theme') and adds a key constraint. There is no wasted verbiage, making it appropriately sized and easy to parse.

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 (destructive operation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It misses essential details about parameters, behavioral traits, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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 description must compensate for the undocumented parameters. It provides no information about 'stylesheet' (likely the theme identifier) or 'force' (likely to bypass checks), leaving their meaning and usage unclear. This gap significantly hinders tool selection and invocation.

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 verb ('Delete') and resource ('a theme'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from other deletion tools like 'wordpress_delete_plugin' or 'wordpress_delete_theme' beyond the theme focus, which is why it's not a 5.

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 includes a usage constraint ('cannot delete active theme'), which provides some guidance on when not to use it. However, it doesn't mention alternatives (e.g., deactivating first) or broader context for when to use this tool versus other theme-related tools, leaving room for improvement.

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