Search across the site

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it uses WordPress's own search index and returns a type label for each hit. This gives the agent meaningful expectations beyond the structured 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?

Two sentences carry the full scope, mechanism, output shape, and a sibling comparison with zero filler. The key differentiating information is front-loaded.

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 read-only search tool with a fully documented schema)Skip? The description clarifies what results look like ('what type each hit belongs to'), which partially compensates for the lack of an output schema. Pagination and site selection are already covered by the schema, so nothing critical is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema itself documents all six parameters, including query, page, per_page, type, subtype, and site_id. The description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond confirming that results include type information, so the 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 states a specific verb ('Search'), a clear resource ('every searchable content type at once'), and the mechanism ('WordPress's own search index'). It also explicitly differentiates itself from list_content, making its scope unmistakable.

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 provides clear context: use this when you need a broad cross-type search, and it explicitly contrasts with list_content's per-type search. It does not enumerate all exclusions or full alternative routing, but the guidance is sufficient for typical selection.

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