wp_update_term

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility and does well: it explains slug changes affect archive URLs, dry-run previews exact changes, production writes require allow_prod, and invalid field sets are refused.

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?

Every sentence serves a purpose and adds critical operational detail. The formatting with backticks and line breaks improves scannability without sacrificing clarity.

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 the tool's behavior, safety defaults, production safeguards, and what a dry run returns. Given the absence of an output schema, it provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema has no property descriptions, but the description compensates for most parameters: fields allowed values, dry_run behavior and default, term_id source, and allow_prod guard. It does not explicitly describe install or taxonomy, though taxonomy is inferable.

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 renames or re-parents one existing term, distinguishing it from creation or deletion tools. It also identifies the resource as an existing term and references wp_list_terms for obtaining the ID.

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?

Provides strong usage guidance: allowed field values, no-op refusal, dry-run default, REST transport requirement, and the allow_prod guard. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, but the 'existing term' wording makes the intended use case clear.

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