wordpress_get_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Get WordPress users with role filtering,' which implies a read operation, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior (though parameters suggest it), error handling, or what 'role filtering' entails. This is inadequate for a tool with parameters and no annotations, leaving significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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 unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. There is no wasted verbiage, earning its place succinctly.

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 complexity (a read operation with parameters and role filtering), lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain parameter usage, return values, error conditions, or how role filtering works, leaving the agent with insufficient information to use the tool effectively in context with its siblings and expected behavior.

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 2 parameters (perPage, page) with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema provides no semantic information. The description mentions 'role filtering' but does not explain how to use the parameters or if role filtering is implemented via these parameters or another mechanism. It adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the low coverage, as the parameters remain largely unexplained.

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 resource ('WordPress users') with a specific feature ('with role filtering'). It distinguishes from some siblings like 'wordpress_get_posts' or 'wordpress_get_media' by specifying users, but does not explicitly differentiate from other user-related tools like 'wordpress_get_user' (singular) or 'wordpress_create_user', which are implied but not named in the sibling list provided.

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 mentions 'role filtering' but does not specify how to apply it (e.g., via parameters or context), nor does it indicate prerequisites, limitations, or when to choose other tools like 'wordpress_get_user' (if it existed) or 'wordpress_search_posts' for different data types. This leaves the agent without explicit usage context.

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