List WordPress installations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: each installation includes a `valid` flag and, when invalid, a `validationError`, and a newly appearing installation indicates WordPress is ready. This goes beyond the minimal safety profile.

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 front-loaded with a clear purpose, then adds practical usage guidance, and finally a useful note about the response's validity fields. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant wording.

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 read-only listing tool with fully documented optional parameters, the description is complete. It explains the main use case, how to poll for readiness, how to filter, and what key fields appear in the response. No output schema exists, but the description covers the essential return semantics.

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 schema already fully documents domain, username, and ownership. The description only lightly rephrases filtering by username and domain to narrow results to a specific website and does not mention the ownership parameter, so it adds little beyond 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List WordPress installations accessible to the authenticated client.' It clearly differentiates this from sibling tools like hosting_listWebsitesV1 by focusing specifically on WordPress installations and adds a distinct polling use case.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: to discover existing WordPress installations and to poll for installation status after calling the install endpoint. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is clear enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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