hosting_listWordPressInstallationsV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that each installation has a `valid` flag and `validationError`, and notes that a new installation appears in the list when ready. It does not mention side effects or authentication details, but the read-only nature is implied by 'list' and 'accessible'.

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?

Three concise sentences with no superfluous text. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by usage guidance and parameter details. Each sentence serves a clear purpose.

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 exists, but the description mentions the `valid` flag and `validationError`, providing key return value context. Pagination or ordering is not covered, but for a list tool with good schema coverage, this is adequate.

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 the baseline is 3. The description only mentions filtering by username and domain, adding no new meaning beyond the schema. It does not compensate for the ownership parameter's default value, which is already in the 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 starts with 'List WordPress installations accessible to the authenticated client', clearly specifying the verb (list) and resource (WordPress installations). It also mentions filtering capabilities and the `valid` flag, distinguishing it from other listing tools like `hosting_listWebsitesV1`.

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?

It explicitly states two use cases: 'discover existing WordPress installations' and 'poll for installation status after calling the install endpoint'. It also describes filtering, but does not explicitly mention when to avoid using it or reference alternative tools among siblings.

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