wordpress_get_capabilities

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. While 'Get' implies a read operation, the description doesn't specify whether this requires admin permissions, what format the capabilities are returned in, or if there are any rate limits. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 gets straight to the point with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool with one parameter and follows a clear subject-verb-object structure.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'capabilities' means in WordPress context, what the return format looks like, or provide any behavioral context beyond the basic purpose. The agent would struggle to use this tool effectively.

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 mentions 'user role' which maps to the single parameter 'role', but with 0% schema description coverage, the schema provides no details about this parameter. The description adds minimal value by implying the parameter is a role name, but doesn't specify format (e.g., slug vs. display name) or provide examples, leaving the parameter semantics incomplete.

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 ('Get') and resource ('capabilities for a user role'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'wordpress_check_user_capability' or 'wordpress_get_roles', which could cause confusion about when to use each.

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. With siblings like 'wordpress_check_user_capability' (which checks a specific capability) and 'wordpress_get_roles' (which lists roles), the agent is left to guess which tool is appropriate for different scenarios involving user capabilities or roles.

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