wordpress_advanced_wp_db_tables

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully indicates the tool returns table metadata (size, engine, rows, collation), but fails to mention safety characteristics (read-only status), performance implications of scanning large tables, or required permissions.

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 appropriately concise as a single sentence front-loaded with the action verb. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is slightly cryptic and doesn't add clear value, but the sentence structure is efficient with no redundant phrases.

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?

Given the 0% schema coverage, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description leaves significant gaps. It fails to document the parameter semantics (what format 'site' takes, the behavior of 'prefix_only') and provides no indication of the return data structure or potential errors.

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 0% description coverage, leaving the description to compensate for the undocumented 'site' and 'prefix_only' parameters. However, the description mentions neither parameter nor explains that 'site' likely identifies the WordPress instance or that 'prefix_only' filters to WordPress tables (defaulting to true).

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 'List[s] all database tables with detailed information' and specifically enumerates the metadata returned (size, engine, rows, collation). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wordpress_advanced_wp_db_query or wordpress_advanced_wp_db_export, which perform different operations on the database.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wordpress_advanced_wp_db_size, wordpress_wp_db_check, or wordpress_advanced_wp_db_query. It does not mention prerequisites, performance considerations for large databases, or when to filter by prefix.

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