wp_create_application_password

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'creates' implies a write operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires admin permissions, what happens on success/failure, whether the password is displayed only once, or any rate limits. For a security-sensitive operation like password creation, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward creation operation and front-loads the essential information.

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 tool that creates application passwords (a security-sensitive write operation) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, what permissions are required, or any security implications. The context demands more comprehensive disclosure.

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?

The description mentions creating a password 'for a user' which aligns with the user_id parameter, but doesn't add meaningful context beyond what's already in the schema descriptions. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 the action ('creates') and resource ('new application password for a user'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'wp_get_application_passwords' or 'wp_delete_application_password' beyond the obvious verb difference.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (like authentication requirements), when this operation is appropriate, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'wp_get_application_passwords' or 'wp_delete_application_password'.

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