hosting_listInstalledWordPressThemesV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the output includes status, updates, and vulnerabilities, implying a read operation. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool is safe and non-destructive, nor does it describe any side effects. The description is adequate but not rich.

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 clear, front-loaded sentences with zero wasted words. The description is efficient and to the point.

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, the description adequately covers output content (status, updates, vulnerabilities). Input parameters are explained. While sibling differentiation could be stronger, the overall context is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'software' parameter and how to get it, but the 'username' parameter is only described as 'username parameter' with no additional context. Overall, minimal extra meaning beyond schema.

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 it lists installed themes on a WordPress installation, including status, updates, and vulnerabilities. The verb 'List' and resource 'installed themes' are specific. The tool name and description distinguish it from siblings like hosting_listWordPressThemesV1 (likely for available themes).

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 provides guidance on how to obtain the required software identifier from another endpoint. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like hosting_listWordPressThemesV1, though the distinction is implied by the name and context.

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