wordpress_update_option

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 mutation (updating a value) but does not disclose key behaviors such as whether the option is created if missing, how serialized data is handled, whether autoload is affected, or required permissions. This lack of detail leaves the agent unaware of side effects.

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 redundancy. Every word conveys meaning, making it appropriately sized for the information it provides.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is underspecified. It lacks essential context about option update behavior, error cases, and return values. Given the WordPress ecosystem's complexities around options (serialization, autoload, creation vs update), this is insufficient.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'option value' but does not explain that 'name' is the option key, that 'value' is stored as a string (potentially serialized), or any type constraints. The description adds minimal value over the raw parameter names.

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 action ('Update') and the specific resource ('WordPress option value in wp_options table'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_option and update_settings, though it does not explicitly contrast them. The verb+resource combination is specific and unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wordpress_update_settings or wordpress_get_option. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context are provided. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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