wordpress_get_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'Get' and 'Returns media item details,' but does not explicitly state that it is read-only, has no side effects, or requires any permissions/authentication. For a read operation, this is a notable omission.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action in the first sentence. The Args/Returns sections are standard and add minimal overhead. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though the Returns line is generic and could be omitted given the output schema.

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 single-item retrieval with an output schema, the description is minimal but adequate. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., the media must exist) or explicitly state that the operation is read-only, but the output schema covers return structure. Given the simplicity, a 3 seems fair.

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 description repeats the parameter name 'media_id' with 'Media ID', which adds no meaning beyond the schema's property name and type. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description was the sole chance to enrich the parameter, but it merely restates the obvious.

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 the action: 'Get a single WordPress media item by ID.' This specifies the verb (Get), resource (media item), and scope (by ID), distinguishing it from list_media (which returns multiple) and get_media_url (which returns only a URL). The purpose 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?

The description implies usage: when you have a media ID and want its details. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like list_media or get_media_url, nor does it mention any exclusions. The context is clear enough but lacks direct guidance on sibling tools.

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