wp_get_settings

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the shape of the result by listing title, tagline, timezone and date format, and 'Get' implies a non-mutating read. It says nothing about permissions, caching, or whether the response is scoped per site, leaving gaps for an unannotated tool.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the parenthetical field list adding real information. Nothing wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names the fields returned, and the single required parameter is fully documented in the schema. It is nearly complete for this simple read tool, only missing a note on scope/permissions and sibling differentiation.

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?

Only one parameter (site) and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself pointing to list_sites. The description adds no syntax or format 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 (Get) and resource (WordPress site settings), then enumerates the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not, however, distinguish itself from near-siblings like wp_site_info, mcp_get_option, or the various seo_get_settings/legal_get_settings tools in the same namespace.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when a different settings-getter (mcp_get_option, wp_site_info, seo_get_settings) is the right choice, and no prerequisites or exclusion criteria. Usage must be inferred entirely from the verb.

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