wordpress_get_debug_log

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

'Read' implies a non-destructive operation, but the description does not disclose file location, size limits, output format, or error behavior. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and offers minimal behavioral context.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is immediately understandable and well-structured.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description is adequate but could be richer. It doesn't clarify whether it reads the entire file, tails the end, or has size constraints, and it doesn't differentiate from wordpress_read_file. Given no annotations or output schema, this is a minimal but viable description.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description need not add parameter-specific meaning. The baseline of 4 applies as there are no parameters to document.

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 states 'Read WordPress debug.log file' with a specific verb and exact resource. This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from broader file-read siblings like wordpress_read_file.

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 such as wordpress_read_file, nor any prerequisites or conditions. There is no mention of how this differs from other read tools.

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