wp_plugin_artifacts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It explicitly states the action is 'remove' which implies destructive behavior, and specifies the affected data (tables and options). However, it does not mention irreversibility, permissions, or the availability of dry_run, which is important for a destructive tool. This is a moderate gap in transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function and followed by a necessary list of supported plugins. Every word is useful, no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description plus schema cover the tool's purpose, parameters, and supported plugins. Without an output schema, return values are not described, but this is not critical for a cleanup tool. The main gap is the lack of explicit safety/usage context (e.g., when to dry_run, warnings about deletion), which could be improved but is not essential for basic invocation.

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 all parameters (site_id, plugins, dry_run) are already described in the schema. The description does not add semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, only listing supported plugins which is also present in the plugins parameter description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 removes database artifacts (tables and options) left behind by deleted plugins. This specific verb+resource combination clearly differentiates it from siblings like wp_cleanup or wp_baseline, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for cleaning up after deleted plugins, and lists supported plugins. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer when to use this tool. A slight lack of explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance prevents a 5.

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