wordpress_search_block_directory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without detailing traits such as whether it's read-only (implied by 'search'), requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 with zero waste—it directly states the tool's action and target. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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's complexity (a search operation with external dependencies), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not address behavioral aspects, parameter details, or expected results, making it inadequate for effective agent use 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 input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the 'term' parameter (e.g., what to search for, format, examples like block names or keywords), leaving the semantics unclear. This fails to add value beyond the bare 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 'Search WordPress.org block directory' clearly states the action (search) and target (WordPress.org block directory), providing a basic purpose. However, it lacks specificity about what constitutes the 'block directory' (e.g., reusable blocks, patterns, plugins) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like 'wordpress_search_posts' or 'wordpress_get_reusable_blocks', making it vague in context.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., internet connectivity, WordPress.org access), exclusions (e.g., not for local blocks), or compare it to similar tools like 'wordpress_get_block_patterns' or 'wordpress_search_posts', leaving the agent without contextual usage cues.

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