mainwp_updates_translations

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It states 'Update translations' implying a mutation but does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, safe to re-run, or what permissions are needed. No output schema or side effects are described.

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 very short and to the point, with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, though it could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

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 the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the result looks like (e.g., success status, changed items) or any behavioral constraints. A more complete description would cover return values or post-conditions.

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 input schema already covers both parameters (site with description, dry_run with description) at 100% coverage. The description does not add any extra meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description 'Update translations on a WordPress site' clearly states the action (update) and the resource (translations). It is specific and easily distinguishes the tool from siblings like mainwp_updates_apply or mainwp_updates_plugins, which handle other types of updates.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to update translations vs. plugins/themes/core updates). There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.

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