wordpress_get_sidebars

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it's a retrieval operation ('Get'), implying it's likely read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't confirm this or add details like permissions, rate limits, or response format. This leaves gaps in transparency for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on behavioral traits or output, which could be helpful for an AI agent. It meets the basic requirement but doesn't excel in completeness for a tool with no structured support.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, aligning with the schema. A baseline of 4 is applied as it compensates adequately for the lack of parameters by not adding unnecessary information.

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 ('all registered sidebar/widget areas'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool 'wordpress_get_sidebar' (singular), which might retrieve a specific sidebar, leaving some ambiguity in sibling differentiation.

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, such as 'wordpress_get_sidebar' for a single sidebar or other retrieval tools. It lacks context on prerequisites, timing, or exclusions, offering minimal usage direction.

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