wordpress_get_plugin_status

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavior. It only states 'Get status and details' without mentioning any side effects, authorization needs, or that it is a read-only operation. The brief description does not compensate for missing annotations.

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 very short (one sentence), which makes it concise, but it sacrifices necessary detail. It is front-loaded but incomplete, so it fails to earn its place fully.

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 lack of output schema and the large set of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not describe return values, parameter format, or differentiate from similar tools like wordpress_get_plugins_detailed.

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 parameter 'plugin' has no description (0% coverage) and the tool description does not explain what value to provide (e.g., plugin slug, name, or path). The description adds zero meaning beyond the 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 it retrieves status and details for one specific plugin. The verb 'Get' and resource 'plugin' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like wordpress_get_plugins or wordpress_get_plugins_detailed, which might also return details.

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 the many alternatives. The description implies use when you need status of a single plugin, but fails to mention situations where other tools (e.g., wordpress_get_plugins) would be better suited.

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