wordpress_get_template_parts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but there is no explicit statement that the tool is safe (no side effects) or what permissions are needed. It does not contradict any 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 a single sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool retrieves and gives examples. However, it does not specify that it returns a list or the structure of the output, which would be helpful.

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 schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter semantics since there are none to describe. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not add value 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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'theme template parts', with concrete examples like 'header, footer'. It distinguishes this tool from similar siblings such as 'wordpress_get_theme_templates' and 'wordpress_get_block_template' by specifying 'parts' and 'block theme components'.

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 context by explaining what template parts are (block theme components) and giving examples. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use get_theme_templates instead), or any exclusions.

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