wp_activate_plugin

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates the core action but does not explain what happens if the plugin is already active, if the plugin is missing, whether activation can partially fail, or what the command returns. For a state-changing tool, this is a meaningful gap.

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 two succinct sentences with no filler. The action and target are front-loaded, and the identifier options are presented immediately after, making the content easy to scan and act on.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers what the plugin argument can be. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the absence of any note about return values, error conditions, or idempotency leaves the definition only minimally complete for an agent that needs to verify successful 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?

The input schema already describes the parameter as 'Plugin file path, slug, or name', and the description adds concrete examples for each form. This enrichment reduces ambiguity and helps the agent correctly format the 'plugin' argument, going slightly beyond the schema's baseline.

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 states a specific action ('Activate') on a specific resource ('installed WordPress plugin'), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like wp_deactivate_plugin, wp_install_plugin, and wp_delete_plugin. It also covers the accepted identifier forms, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 word 'installed' implies the plugin must already be installed, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of wp_install_plugin or wp_deactivate_plugin, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond installation.

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