wordpress_wp_core_update

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

With no annotations, the description correctly identifies the dry-run mode and operation type, and adds a backup warning. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like downtime, rollback capabilities, or error handling, leaving some behavioral aspects uncovered.

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 very concise with three sentences, front-loading the core purpose and key behavior (dry run), and includes a critical warning. No unnecessary words.

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?

In the absence of annotations and output schema, the description omits details about the version parameter, the return format of a dry run, and any prerequisites. This leaves gaps for effective tool 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 description adds meaning to the dry_run parameter by explaining its default and effect, but does not clarify the 'site' or 'version' parameters. Given 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but is incomplete.

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 updates WordPress core, distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle other updates (e.g., themes, plugins), and explicitly mentions the dry-run default behavior, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains the default dry-run mode and how to apply updates by setting dry_run=false, and includes a backup warning. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over other core-related tools or when to avoid it.

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