wp_cli_list_commands

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that the list serves as an allowlist and that anything not present is refused, which is valuable non-obvious behavior. It also implies a read-only listing operation, though it does not detail output format or potential errors.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the critical allowlist constraint without any filler. Every word contributes meaningful guidance.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description covers both what will be returned (allowed commands, subcommands, refused flags) and how to interpret the result (anything absent is refused). This is sufficient for an agent to decide to call it and use its output correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so parameter documentation is unnecessary. The description still provides useful semantics about what the output contains, which is the relevant information for an agent calling the tool.

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 identifies a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource: allowlisted WP-CLI commands, their permitted subcommands, and refused global flags. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like wp_cli_execute and wp_cli_status, which perform different actions.

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 implies the tool is meant to be consulted to discover what may be run, especially with the statement that anything absent is refused. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this versus wp_cli_execute or other WP-CLI-related tools, leaving the usage context to inference.

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