wp_list_comments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and delivers almost nothing. 'List' weakly implies a read-only retrieval, but pagination behavior, default page size, ordering, and permission requirements are unstated.

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?

Two words contain no waste, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. For a five-parameter listing tool with filtering and pagination options, the definition is too thin to be considered appropriately sized.

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?

No output schema and no annotations mean the description should explain return shape and behavioral traits, and it does none of that. The only saving grace is the fully covered parameter schema, which prevents this from being a 1.

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 all five parameters (page, post, site, status, per_page) are already documented in the schema with the status enum. The description adds no meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clear verb and resource ('List comments'), so an agent knows this retrieves comments. However, it adds nothing beyond restating the tool name and gives no scope detail (site-wide vs per-post), so it cannot be distinguished from siblings like wp_get_comment or wp_moderate_comments without opening the schema.

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 alternatives, and no indication of when this is preferable to wp_get_comment (single fetch) or wp_moderate_comments. The agent is left to infer usage entirely from the sibling list.

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