wordpress_get_comment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose safety and side effects. It only says 'Get' which implies read-only, but does not explicitly state non-mutating behavior, error handling, or any permissions needed. The description adds no value beyond the tool name.

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 short and uses a structured Args/Returns format, which is easy to parse. It contains no redundant phrases or filler, making it appropriately compact for a simple getter tool.

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?

Given it has only one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose. However, it omits edge cases like not-found behavior, versioning specifics, or any WordPress-specific nuances that might affect use. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 0%. The only parameter, comment_id, is described as 'Comment ID' in the args line, which merely repeats the schema property name without adding type hints, format, examples, or meaning. This provides zero additional context beyond the schema.

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 'Get a single WordPress comment by ID' with a specific resource (comment) and action (get), distinguishing it from list_comments and other comment mutation tools. The verb+resource pattern is 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like wordpress_list_comments or wordpress_get_post. The description does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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