wp_get_options_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the basic operation and gives no information about return format, handling of missing keys, or any limits, leaving the agent to guess what happens when a requested option does not exist.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core operation is front-loaded, and the only additional sentence provides direct instruction on the input format. Every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter read tool, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description should have explained at least the return shape or behavior for nonexistent keys. It does neither, leaving a meaningful gap in what an agent needs to properly interpret the result.

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% and already documents the comma-separated key format with an example. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond reinforcing what the schema states, 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 verb ('Get'), the resource ('WordPress options'), and the batch scope ('multiple... at once'), which directly distinguishes it from the sibling wp_get_option (singular). It is specific and immediately understandable.

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 phrase 'at once' and 'multiple' imply this tool is for retrieving several options rather than one, giving some usage context. However, it never explicitly names alternatives like wp_get_option or states when NOT to use this tool, so guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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