wp_get_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Get detailed information' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'including all available sizes and URLs' discloses what the caller should expect. It does not discuss error cases or permissions, but for a simple read tool the core behavior is transparent.

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?

One tightly written sentence with no filler. The main action and key differentiator are front-loaded, and every word contributes to the agent's understanding.

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?

With only one required parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough orientation by naming the resource and the expected detail level. It could mention the response shape more explicitly, but for a low-complexity single-resource getter it is reasonably complete.

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%, with 'id' documented as 'Media attachment ID'. The description does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond already stating it targets a single media file, so it stays at the baseline for well-covered schemas.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('media file'), and scope ('single media file'), and distinguishes itself from wp_list_media by emphasizing a single item. It also adds concrete detail about the return content ('all available sizes and URLs').

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 context is clear: use this when you need detailed info about one media file. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like wp_list_media for multiple files or wp_upload_media for creation, but the singular focus and 'detailed information' phrasing provide adequate usage context.

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