wp_get_settings

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

With no annotations, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It clearly states 'Read-only' and explains that only the seven listed fields are returned, while explicitly noting exclusions (site URL, admin email, language). It also mentions the required authentication level and transport. This fully discloses the tool's effects and limitations.

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 relatively concise but includes slight redundancy, such as repeating 'editable settings' and then saying 'deliberately narrow: only those seven fields are returned'. It is still well-organized and not overly verbose, earning a strong score.

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?

While the description covers auth requirements, field exclusions, and read-only behavior, it omits any explanation of the 'install' parameter and provides no output format details. Since there is no output schema, this missing context makes the tool incomplete for a new user.

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?

The only parameter, 'install', is completely unexplained in the description and the schema provides no description (coverage 0%). A user cannot infer what value to pass (e.g., site ID, URL, or name) without external knowledge. This is a significant gap in usability.

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's purpose: to read a site's editable settings, and explicitly lists the seven fields it returns. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_get_option or wp_set_setting, making its function unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (to retrieve the specified settings) and notes its narrow scope, implying that other settings would require different tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state 'use this instead of X', so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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