wp_list_media

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds information about the output (URLs, types, metadata) but does not disclose behaviors like pagination defaults, sorting, or access restrictions. This is acceptable for a simple read-only tool but adds limited depth beyond the annotations.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists the key return information. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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?

For a simple list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential context: what it lists and what it returns. It does not explicitly mention pagination behavior, but the schema handles that. Given the low complexity, the description is nearly complete.

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 100% coverage for both parameters (per_page and media_type) with clear descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage but provides no extra value.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair ('List media files') and specifies the resource ('WordPress library'), distinguishing it from sibling list tools like wp_list_posts. It also mentions the return type, which reinforces its purpose as a read/list operation.

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 the tool is used for listing media files, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It is straightforward enough that a user can infer usage, but it lacks proactive comparison with sibling tools.

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