wordpress_get_performance_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get', but it does not explain what specific metrics are included, whether the operation can be expensive or impact performance, or any authentication requirements. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. Every term ('Get', 'WordPress', 'performance metrics', 'resource usage') contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

Despite having no parameters, the description is incomplete for an agent. There is no output schema, so the agent does not know what shape the metrics take or which specific metrics are returned. The description also fails to mention any relationship to sibling tools or potential side effects, leaving context gaps for a tool with no other structured information.

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 tool has zero parameters, giving a baseline of 4. The description adds meaning by clarifying that the tool returns performance and resource usage data, which is helpful since the schema is empty and there are no parameter details to document.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies a clear resource: 'WordPress performance metrics and resource usage'. This clearly distinguishes it as a read-only retrieval tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like 'get_system_info' or 'get_site_health' which may overlap in purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description simply states what it does without indicating whether it should be used for troubleshooting, monitoring, or comparing against get_system_info, get_site_health, or get_debug_log. No exclusions or preferred contexts are provided.

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