wordpress_get_site_health

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

The description only states that it returns health status, with no details on side effects, permissions, or response format. Since no annotations are provided, the description should offer more behavioral context but fails to do so.

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 a single sentence without unnecessary details, though the '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds no value. It is appropriately concise but could benefit from slight expansion.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is insufficient. It covers return content but omits input specification, making the tool partially defined for the 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 schema coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the required 'site' parameter at all. It provides no hints on the expected format (e.g., URL, slug), leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 checks WordPress site health and accessibility, listing specific components like WordPress, WooCommerce, and SEO plugin availability. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'wordpress_site_health', which may cause confusion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'check_all_projects_health' or 'get_project_health'. The description lacks any context for appropriate use cases.

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