wordpress_set_schema_markup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Add JSON-LD schema markup to post' and gives no details about whether existing schema is overwritten or appended, whether validation occurs, what permissions are required, or what the API returns. This is insufficient for a write operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It earns its place by stating the core action, but it is arguably too terse given the tool's parameter complexity, so it loses one point for under-specification rather than over-verbose structure.

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 a nested schemaData object, three required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-sentence description is inadequate. It fails to explain the expected format of schemaData, common schemaType values, whether the operation replaces existing markup, post requirements, or error cases. The tool is usable only if the agent already knows WordPress schema markup conventions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description offers minimal compensation. It implies 'post' maps to postId and 'schema markup' maps to schemaData/schemaType, but it does not explain what schemaType values are valid (e.g., Article, Product), how schemaData should be structured, or the relationship between schemaType and schemaData. Both schema and description leave the parameters largely ambiguous.

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 tool's verb and resource: 'Add JSON-LD schema markup to post'. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like wordpress_set_og_tags and wordpress_set_seo_meta by explicitly naming the JSON-LD schema format, which is a specific and meaningful purpose.

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 vs alternatives. It doesn't mention that schema markup differs from og_tags, twitter_cards, or canonical_url, nor does it state any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. Context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and sibling list.

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