wordpress_get_current_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature implicitly via 'Get' and lists return fields, but omits authentication requirements, error scenarios (e.g., unauthenticated requests), and rate limiting details.

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 efficiently single-sentence and front-loaded with the core action. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is extraneous metadata noise but minimally intrusive. No redundant or wasted language otherwise.

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 simple single-parameter nature and absence of output schema, the description adequately documents return values. However, it remains incomplete due to the undocumented 'site' parameter, which is critical for invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the required 'site' parameter. The description fails to compensate by not mentioning this parameter at all, leaving agents without guidance on expected format (URL, domain, site ID) for this mandatory field.

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 provides a specific verb ('Get'), clear resource ('currently authenticated user'), and enumerates exact return fields (ID, name, username, email, roles). The 'currently authenticated' qualifier effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like wordpress_list_users.

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 implies usage context through 'currently authenticated user' (indicating it retrieves the logged-in user's profile), but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over wordpress_list_users or error conditions when no user is authenticated.

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