wordpress_delete_widget

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

The description only says 'Delete' without disclosing whether deletion is permanent, what the 'force' parameter does, or any required permissions. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, and it does not adequately address the destructive nature of the operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is concise and easy to parse, though it omits important details about parameters and behavior, making it slightly too terse for a fully useful description.

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 destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is too sparse. It does not specify the role of 'force', the effect of deletion, or any warnings about reversibility. The low complexity of the tool does not excuse the lack of essential 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 description does not explain the purpose of 'widgetId' or 'force'. The input schema also lacks descriptions (0% coverage), so the agent has no information about what these parameters mean or how to set them. The description adds no value beyond the raw schema.

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), the object (widget), and the location (from a sidebar). It is specific enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like wordpress_update_widget or wordpress_get_widgets.

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. It does not mention that to modify a widget one should use wordpress_update_widget, or that to retrieve widgets one should use wordpress_get_widgets. Without such context, the agent is left without decision support.

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