wp_performance_alerts

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, side effects, or rate limits. For a read operation, it should clarify if it triggers any actions or has performance implications.

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?

A single sentence with no wasted words. It is concise but could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose. Acceptable for a simple retrieval tool.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the output contains, how anomalies are detected, or when to use this tool over sibling performance tools. More context is needed for effective agent usage.

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 coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so 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 'Get performance alerts and anomaly detection results' clearly identifies the verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like wp_performance_stats or wp_performance_history. However, it lacks detail on what constitutes 'alerts' or 'anomalies'.

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 such as wp_performance_stats or wp_performance_history. The description does not indicate 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.