wordpress_run_cron

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention potential side effects (e.g., executing all due events, possible performance impact), whether the operation blocks until completion, or what the return value indicates. The single sentence provides no context beyond the action itself.

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 that immediately states the action and resource. There is no redundant information, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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, no output schema, and a simple purpose, the description is reasonably complete. It specifies exactly what the tool does, though it could be enhanced by a note about running all due cron jobs or a reference to related cron tools, but this is a minor gap.

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 accepts zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline score is 4. The description correctly avoids inventing parameters, and the empty schema does not require additional parameter explanation.

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 'Manually trigger WordPress cron execution' clearly specifies the verb 'trigger' and the resource 'WordPress cron execution', which unambiguously distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like list_cron_jobs, schedule_event, and unschedule_event. It is concise and action-oriented.

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 schedule_event or list_cron_jobs. The description does not mention typical use cases (e.g., testing cron after changes) or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the word 'Manually', which falls short of explicit guidance.

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