wordpress_get_unused_media

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 'Find unused media files' but doesn't clarify what 'unused' means (e.g., not attached to posts), whether this is a read-only operation (implied by 'Find' but not explicit), or details on output format (e.g., list of files with metadata). This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 'Find unused media files in library' is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose with zero waste. It's appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters and clear intent, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate for a basic 'find' operation. However, it lacks details on what 'unused' entails, the return format, or any behavioral traits, making it incomplete for fully informed usage without additional context.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter details, which is appropriate, but it could have mentioned any implicit filters (e.g., by file type) if applicable, though not required for a high score given the lack of parameters.

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 'Find unused media files in library' clearly states the verb ('Find') and resource ('unused media files in library'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'wordpress_get_media' or 'wordpress_bulk_delete_media', which would require mentioning its unique focus on 'unused' files to fully distinguish it.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing media files in the library), exclusions (e.g., not for deleting files), or related tools like 'wordpress_get_media' for general media listing or 'wordpress_bulk_delete_media' for removal, leaving usage context unclear.

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