wp_seo_generate_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether the generated schema is persisted to the site or merely returned, whether an SEO plugin/API key is required, or whether generation depends on existing content, all of which matter for a tool whose name contains 'generate'.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the gaps elsewhere.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete: it never clarifies the return value (JSON-LD payload vs. confirmation of a write) or the dependency on a configured SEO plugin. This is the main ambiguity an agent would face.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'site' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including its config-file origin and multi-site requirement. The description adds nothing about parameters, which is acceptable here since the schema does the work.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Generate') with a specific artifact ('JSON-LD structured data schema') and states the outcome ('enhanced search results'). It stops short of distinguishing this tool from siblings like wp_seo_validate_schema or wp_seo_generate_metadata, so the boundary between generating and validating schema is left to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of the closely related siblings wp_seo_validate_schema and wp_seo_generate_metadata. An agent cannot tell from the description whether it should run this before or after validation, or how it relates to metadata generation.

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