wp_get_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only says what it does, not what happens if the ID doesn't exist, whether it requires authentication, what fields are returned, or whether it's a safe read operation. Very sparse for a retrieval tool with no annotation support.

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?

Single, short sentence with zero waste. Front-loaded and clear.

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 simple getter with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too minimal. It doesn't mention authentication requirements, error behavior, or what user data is returned, leaving the agent guessing about invocation prerequisites and results.

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 0% and there is only 1 parameter (id), which is required. The description repeats the parameter name but adds no format, range, or semantics beyond what's already in the schema. Baseline for 1 parameter with high schema coverage would be 3, but here coverage is low; however, the parameter is self-evident (an integer ID), so the lack of extra detail is less critical.

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?

Clearly states the specific verb (Get) and resource (WordPress user) with the ID-based lookup. Siblings like wp_get_post, wp_get_page, wp_get_media follow the same pattern, so it's distinguishable by resource name, but no extra differentiation is offered.

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 guidance on when to use this versus wp_users_search or other user tools. It implies retrieval by ID but doesn't tell the agent to search if the ID is unknown.

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