wordpress_update_term

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without explaining how updates are applied (merge vs replace), what fields can be updated, required permissions, error behavior, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence, which is concise and free of fluff. However, it is under-specified and does not provide enough substance to be considered appropriately sized for the tool's complexity. It earns a middle score for being brief but not sufficiently informative.

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?

For a tool with three required parameters, a nested 'updates' object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain return values, error handling, parameter structure, or any behavioral nuances, making the description incomplete for safe and correct invocation.

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 does not explain any of the three parameters. The 'updates' object is completely opaque—no allowed keys or structure are mentioned. The description fails to compensate for the schema's lack of documentation, leaving the agent without necessary parameter semantics.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'a term in a taxonomy', providing a specific and understandable purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like wordpress_update_category or wordpress_update_tag, which also update terms in specific taxonomies, so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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_category, wordpress_update_tag, or wordpress_create_term. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or any decision criteria for choosing this tool.

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