Create a WooCommerce attribute term by specifying site, attribute ID, and name, with an optional slug for organizing product variations.
Create a term for an attribute
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Term name | |
| site | Yes | Site id (see list_sites) | |
| slug | No | ||
| attribute_id | Yes | Attribute ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.4.0Input schema / properties / siteAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Site id (see list_sites)",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "attribute_id",
- "name"
-]New value: +[
+ "site",
+ "attribute_id",
+ "name"
+]v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are absent, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only implies a write operation but does not disclose required permissions, whether the attribute must already exist, side effects, or error conditions.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately terse for a simple create tool, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing context.
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 no annotations, no output schema, and a mutation tool, the description is incomplete. It omits usage context, preconditions, and behavioral details, leaving the agent with little more than the tool name and schema.
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 75%; three of four parameters are documented in the schema, but the 'slug' parameter has no description. The tool description provides no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already states, and it does not compensate for the undocumented parameter.
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 (Create) and resource (term for an attribute), which distinguishes it from siblings like woo_create_attribute (creates the attribute itself) and mcp_create_term (generic term). However, it does not clarify that this is specifically a WooCommerce product-attribute term, leaving a small gap.
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 tool versus alternatives such as woo_create_attribute or woo_list_attribute_terms. The description implies creation but offers no prerequisites, context, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.