wp_list_comments

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

With no annotations, the description correctly carries the burden of declaring side effects by stating 'Read-only'. It also discloses the required app password capability. It does not mention output pagination or error behavior, but the key behavioral guarantee of not modifying data is explicit.

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 compact, well-structured, and free of redundant text. Each line adds necessary information about fields, filters, defaults, or requirements.

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?

The description covers filters, defaults, and permissions, but lacks output format/pagination details and leaves the required install parameter unexplained. Given there is no output schema and no annotations, these omissions leave some ambiguity for an agent.

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 description explains status values and the source of post_id, but the required install parameter is not described at all. Since the schema has zero parameter descriptions, the missing explanation for a required parameter is a significant gap.

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 as listing comments, identifies the returned fields, and explicitly marks it as read-only. This distinguishes it from sibling moderation/deletion tools like wp_moderate_comment and wp_delete_comment.

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 gives concrete usage guidance: how to filter by post_id and/or status, what happens when both are omitted, and the required permission and transport. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for comment moderation, but the read-only label and filter instructions are sufficient for most use cases.

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