scaffold_wp_cli_command

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

No annotations provided; the description carries full burden. It lists features but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether files are overwritten, required permissions, or error conditions. Minimal transparency beyond the basic function.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key features without extraneous words.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should explain what the tool generates (e.g., file paths, structure). It only mentions 'class with...' but lacks detail on output location, side effects, or prerequisites. Incomplete for a scaffolding tool.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond repeating that it involves arguments and synopsis. Baseline of 3 applies as schema already documents parameters sufficiently.

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 tool generates a WP-CLI command class and specifies included features (arguments, synopsis, progress bar, ServiceProvider registration). It distinguishes from sibling scaffold tools which target different components.

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 usage for WP-CLI command scaffolding but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., generate_command, other scaffold tools). No when-not or prerequisites mentioned.

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