wordpress_get_site_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It states 'complete' and 'including available API routes' but does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only nature, performance implications, or data freshness). This is insufficient for a tool that likely returns a large dataset.

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 that is front-loaded with the tool's purpose. No wasted words.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It mentions the key output (API routes) but lacks details on what 'complete site information' entails. For a tool with broad scope, this could mislead an agent about the data structure.

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 no parameters, so the description need not explain them. Schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description does not add extra meaning but is not required to.

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 'Get complete WordPress site information including available API routes', specifying the verb (get), resource (site info), and a distinguishing detail (API routes). This differentiates it from sibling tools that focus on specific aspects (e.g., plugins, posts).

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 implies the tool is for general site information, and the sibling tools list many specific info tools (e.g., wordpress_get_plugins), making it clear when to use this general one vs specialized ones. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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