wp_seo_suggest_internal_links

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It doesn't say whether this is a read-only analysis or whether it mutates content, how the target content is identified (the schema exposes only a 'site' parameter), what auth/permissions are needed, or whether results are persisted. It is ambiguous whether this even matches the underlying capability.

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 padding or repetition. Efficient, though its brevity contributes to the missing behavioral detail rather than being purely a virtue.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must carry everything — yet it omits how target content is selected, whether a post/page ID is required, and what the suggestions contain. For an SEO analysis tool with zero structured support, this leaves the agent guessing.

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?

Only one parameter ('site') with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies given full coverage on a single param.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource: 'Analyze content and suggest relevant internal linking opportunities.' An agent can tell this apart from wp_seo_analyze_content and wp_seo_keyword_research by the 'internal linking' resource, though the description never explicitly names those siblings as alternatives.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as wp_seo_analyze_content or wp_seo_site_audit. The 'for better SEO' clause is aspirational rather than a usage condition.

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