wordpress_get_failed_logins

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states a read operation without disclosing any side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. It does not describe what constitutes a 'failed login' (e.g., time range, IP) or the return format, leaving 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 short, single sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is appropriately sized but lacks additional detail that could fit without being verbose.

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 simplicity (no parameters) but lack of output schema, the description should explain the return data (e.g., fields like timestamp, IP, username). It does not, leaving the agent guessing about the output. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so no parameter information is needed. However, the description fails to clarify the default behavior or scope of the retrieved data (e.g., all failed logins ever, or only recent ones). For a no-param tool, the description should explain what data is returned.

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 tool retrieves failed login attempts and adds the purpose 'for security monitoring'. The verb 'Get' and resource 'failed logins' are specific. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like wordpress_get_debug_log which may also contain failed login data.

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 (e.g., wordpress_get_debug_log). The description implies a security monitoring use case but does not give explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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