wp_update_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose two important traits: changing the front page is site-wide and dry-run is supported. However, it does not explain permission requirements, reversibility, or what happens when partial settings are provided, which are significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently states the primary purpose and calls out the two most important behavioral nuances. The phrasing around dry-run is slightly ambiguous, but the overall structure is tight and scannable.

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?

This tool has 20 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must carry substantial contextual load. It leaves out return value behavior, validation rules, side effects of applying settings, and any guidance on how dry-run interacts with the output. It is far from complete for an agent to invoke correctly and confidently.

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 only 5%, and the description adds meaning for only one parameter area ('front page'). The other 19 parameters rely entirely on their names and types in the schema, which is inadequate for parameters like page_on_front, page_for_posts, default_category, and date_format. The description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 names the operation and resource: 'Update WordPress settings.' It distinguishes this from the many post/page/media tools in the sibling list, though it does not explicitly contrast with wp_get_settings or other settings-related tools. The added front-page note gives useful specificity about scope.

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_get_settings, wp_update_post, or wp_update_page. The description implies it is for updating site-wide WordPress settings but does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or when a different update tool would be more appropriate.

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