wp_activate_plugin

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add useful context beyond the schema — the MCP allowlist requirement and safe-mode confirmation behavior — but does not disclose the side effects of plugin activation (activation hooks, potential site instability) or what happens on success/failure.

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 sentences with zero wasted words: purpose plus example in the first sentence, constraints in the second. Front-loaded with the core action, and every clause earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a simple two-parameter tool with schemas that fully document the params, but there is no output schema or annotations to compensate. Missing disclosure of activation side effects, the meaning of safe mode, and expected return behavior leaves notable gaps for an agent deciding whether this mutation is safe to invoke.

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 documents both parameters. The description adds a concrete slug example and reiterates the confirm-in-safe-mode rule, which is marginal value beyond the schema — consistent with the baseline of 3.

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?

States a specific verb (activate), resource (plugin), and method (by slug) with a concrete example (litespeed-cache/litespeed-cache.php). The purpose is unambiguous and inherently distinguished from the sibling wp_deactivate_plugin and listing tools like wp_list_plugins.

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?

Provides clear usage prerequisites: the plugin slug must be on the MCP allowlist, and confirm is mandatory in safe mode. It gives actionable conditions for calling the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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