wp_list_comments

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 says 'List comments,' which connotes a read operation, but it does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, whether any permissions are needed, or what the response shape looks like. With zero annotation support, this is a noticeable 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately identifies the verb and resource, then lists the filtering options compactly. There is no redundant filler, and every clause earns its place despite only restating schema-visible info.

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 simple listing tool whose 5 optional parameters are fully described in the schema, the one-sentence description is adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves some ambiguity around the return structure and any ordering or permission constraints, so it is minimally viable but not rich.

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 the schema already documents every parameter including the allowed status values, defaults, and meaning of search and post_id. The description merely restates these dimensions without adding extra semantic detail, meeting the baseline of 3 for complete schema coverage.

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 verb ('List'), a clear resource ('comments'), and enumerates the filtering dimensions (status, post ID, search). It naturally distinguishes from the singular 'wp_get_comment' sibling by being a plural listing operation, so an agent can identify the tool's role without opening the schema.

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 on when to choose this tool over alternatives like wp_get_comment, wp_update_comment_status, or wp_delete_comment. The description only implies usage through the word 'List' and the optional filters; there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools.

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