wordpress_wp_db_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It successfully declares the read-only safety trait, but fails to describe what happens when errors are detected (return format, error codes, or whether it outputs a report) or what specific integrity checks are performed.

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?

Three tight sentences with minimal redundancy, though the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise rather than descriptive content. The safety declaration ('Read-only operation') is appropriately placed at the end as a cautionary note.

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?

Adequate for a basic diagnostic tool, but gaps remain: the undocumented 'site' parameter is critical for invocation, and with no output schema provided, the description should have mentioned what output to expect (e.g., list of corrupted tables, success boolean).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for the required 'site' parameter, the description must compensate but provides zero information about what 'site' represents (domain name? Site ID? URL format?), leaving users ambiguous about the input value required.

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?

Clear verb ('Check') and resource ('WordPress database'), with specific scope ('errors', 'integrity checks'). The 'Read-only operation' clause implicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools like wordpress_advanced_wp_db_repair and wordpress_wp_db_optimize, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 'Read-only operation' hint provides implicit safety guidance, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus repair/optimize tools, nor any mention of prerequisites (e.g., requiring admin privileges or database connectivity).

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