Wordpress Get Media Url

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read, so the bar is lower. The description contributes the fact that the returned URL is public-facing, which is modest added context, but says nothing about behavior for private/draft media, permissions, or failure modes.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the purpose with zero filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is so brief that it could have afforded one clause on when to prefer it over adjacent media tools.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the input schema fully documents both parameters. For a simple two-parameter read tool this is nearly complete; only the missing routing guidance against sibling media tools leaves a small gap.

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 both media_id and size are already documented with a size default of 'full' and enumerated values in the schema. The description adds no format or semantic detail beyond that, 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?

States a specific verb and resource: fetching the public URL of a WordPress media item. This is distinguishable from wordpress_get_media (which returns metadata), though the description never explicitly contrasts the two. Clear and specific, but no sibling differentiation.

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 on when to use this versus wordpress_get_media or wordpress_list_media. Nothing indicates prerequisites (e.g., that the media item must exist or be published) or when a different tool would be preferable. The context is left entirely to inference.

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