wp_get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly indicates a read-only retrieval, but it omits details about error handling (e.g., if the user ID is not found), authentication requirements, or whether the returned data includes all fields. The description is straightforward but lacks behavioral depth.

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, perfectly front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with well-documented parameters, the description is adequate but lacks completeness. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., user object fields), error cases (e.g., 404), or how to handle multiple sites. Given no output schema, slightly more context would be beneficial.

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 has 100% parameter coverage with clear descriptions for both 'site' and 'id'. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, simply restating that retrieval is by ID. Since the schema already explains parameters well, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb (retrieves), resource (single user), and identification method (by their ID). It distinctly differentiates from siblings like 'wp_list_users' (which lists multiple users) and 'wp_get_current_user' (which gets the current user).

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?

The description implies usage when you have a specific user ID, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as 'wp_list_users' for batch retrieval or 'wp_get_current_user' for the authenticated user. No when-not-to-use conditions are mentioned.

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