wordpress_update_option

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Update' which implies a mutation, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions (e.g., admin access), potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing values), or error handling. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary elaboration, earning full marks for 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 the tool's complexity as a mutation operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'wp_options table' entails, potential return values, or error scenarios, leaving the agent with insufficient context for safe and effective use.

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 description mentions 'option value' which hints at the 'name' and 'value' parameters, but with 0% schema description coverage, it doesn't add meaningful details beyond the schema. It lacks examples, format requirements, or constraints, so it only meets the baseline for minimal parameter information.

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 resource ('WordPress option value in wp_options table'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'wordpress_update_settings' or 'wordpress_get_option', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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, such as 'wordpress_update_settings' for broader settings or 'wordpress_get_option' for retrieval. It lacks context about prerequisites, permissions, or typical use cases, offering minimal usage direction.

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