wordpress_bulk_reassign_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses it's a bulk mutation, max 100 IDs, and returns processed/errors/total. However, it lacks details on idempotency, error handling for invalid IDs, partial success behavior, and required permissions. This is minimal but adequate.

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?

Two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and key constraints (use cases, max IDs, output structure). No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the primary action.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the primary use case and constraints. It mentions return fields (processed/errors/total) but omits error scenarios, permissions, and step-by-step guidance. Still, it provides enough for an agent to use the tool correctly in typical cases.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'target_post' usage (0 for detach) and implies 'media_ids' are a list. However, 'site' is not described, and 'media_ids' format (IDs vs. URLs) is ambiguous. Partial compensation, but not fully clarifying all parameters.

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 verb 'reassign' and the resource 'parent post of media attachments', specifying a bulk operation. It distinguishes itself from sibling media tools by focusing on reassigning parent in bulk, not deleting or updating individual media.

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 explicitly mentions use cases: moving attachments between posts or detaching (with target_post=0). It also notes a batch limit of 100 IDs. However, it does not contrast with alternatives like wordpress_update_media for single reassignment, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer when to use this tool.

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