wp_create_user

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 that a new user is created and mentions optional fields, but does not disclose behavior around duplicate usernames/emails, password auto-generation, whether an email notification is sent, required permissions, 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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. It is appropriately concise, though it does not add any structured detail that could help an agent beyond the minimum.

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 create operation with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not explain what happens on success or failure, what permissions are needed, or what the return value is. The schema covers parameters, but the overall context is incomplete for safe 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 100%, so every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds modest grouping ('optional role/name fields') but no deeper meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Create') and the resource ('a new WordPress user'), and names the key inputs (username, email, optional role/name fields). It distinguishes itself from related operations like wp_update_user and wp_get_user through the phrase 'Create a new', but it does not explicitly call out 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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wp_update_user, wp_get_user, or wp_list_users. The only usage signal is the word 'Create' and 'new', which implies creating rather than updating or reading, but there is no explicit context, prerequisites, or when-not-to-use information.

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