wordpress_get_table_preview

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

With no annotations present, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, error handling for missing tables, or whether there is pagination. It only mentions the default row limit, which is insufficient.

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 extremely concise at 10 words, front-loading the purpose and key detail (default 10 rows). No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

For a simple tool with no output schema, the description does not specify the format of returned data, potential errors, or how to get more rows. It is incomplete for effective use by an AI agent.

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% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain what the 'table' parameter refers to (e.g., table name, case sensitivity). The single parameter is left ambiguous, requiring inference from context.

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 preview of table data' with a specific verb and resource, and includes the default limit of 10 rows, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_table_structure' or 'list_tables'.

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, such as when a full table dump is needed or when structure is required. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or limitations.

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