wordpress_shortcode_exists

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 the tool checks registration status, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions required, whether it checks globally or per context, error handling for unregistered shortcodes, or performance considerations. This leaves gaps for safe and effective use.

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 no wasted words, clearly front-loading the purpose. It's appropriately sized for a simple check operation, 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's simplicity (1 parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values (e.g., boolean or structured response), error conditions, and usage context, which are essential for an agent to invoke it correctly without guesswork.

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, and the tool description doesn't add any parameter-specific information. It doesn't explain what 'tag' represents (e.g., the shortcode name like '[gallery]'), its format, or examples. However, with only one parameter, the baseline is 4, but the lack of any semantic detail reduces it to 3 as the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 'Check if a shortcode is registered' clearly states the verb ('Check') and resource ('shortcode'), specifying it verifies registration status. It distinguishes from siblings like 'wordpress_execute_shortcode' (which runs a shortcode) and 'wordpress_list_shortcodes' (which lists all shortcodes), but doesn't explicitly mention these alternatives in the description itself.

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 scenarios like verifying a shortcode before execution, checking plugin functionality, or troubleshooting, nor does it reference sibling tools like 'wordpress_list_shortcodes' for broader queries or 'wordpress_execute_shortcode' for active use.

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