Discover taxonomies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a behavioral insight: taxonomies not listed are registered with show_in_rest => false and unreachable over REST, which helps agents understand the meaning of absence. It also describes the return fields (REST base, post types, hierarchical), which is output context rather than behavior, but still useful.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary action is stated first, followed by the return fields and a clarifying constraint. Every word is useful.

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 listing tool with optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (REST base, applicable post types, hierarchical flag) and the meaning of absent taxonomies. It doesn't cover pagination or potential errors, but those are minor for a read-only discovery tool; the description is sufficiently 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?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for site_id and for_type. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb 'List' and clearly defines the resource (every taxonomy on the site) with scope (categories, tags, custom taxonomies). It distinguishes from siblings like list_terms by focusing on taxonomy definitions rather than terms, and from discover_content_types. The added note about show_in_rest => false clarifies what is reachable.

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: use this to discover all taxonomies and their properties. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like list_terms or discover_content_types, nor does it state situations where it should not be used. It provides no exclusions or alternative routing.

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