wordpress_delete_user

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 states the tool deletes a user and reassigns content, but does not cover critical aspects like required permissions, irreversibility of deletion, potential side effects (e.g., impact on linked data), or error handling. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 user') and adds necessary context ('reassign their content to another user') without waste. Every word earns its place, making it appropriately sized and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 destructive delete operation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It misses critical context such as behavioral risks, parameter details, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema does not document the parameters. The description mentions reassigning content to another user, which implies the 'reassign' parameter's purpose, but does not explain 'userId' or provide any details on parameter formats, constraints, or examples. It adds minimal value beyond the bare schema, failing to compensate for the coverage 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete a user') and specifies the resource ('user'), with an additional detail about content reassignment. It distinguishes from siblings like 'wordpress_delete_post' or 'wordpress_delete_comment' by focusing on users, but does not explicitly differentiate from other user-related tools (e.g., 'wordpress_remove_capability' or 'wordpress_update_user'), which keeps it from a perfect score.

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, such as 'wordpress_update_user' for deactivation or other deletion tools. It mentions reassignment of content, which hints at a prerequisite (having another user to reassign to), but does not explicitly state when or why to choose this tool over others, leaving usage context vague.

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