wordpress_get_reusable_blocks

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get reusable blocks' with no mention of return format, pagination, filtering, ordering, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to know what to expect or what it can do with the result.

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 short sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action ('Get') and the resource ('reusable blocks'), making it immediately scannable. Every word serves a purpose.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is somewhat under-specified. It explains the basic action but does not describe what the returned data contains, whether it's a simple list, or how it handles large collections. Given the many sibling tools, more context would help avoid confusion with block types or patterns.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details and does not attempt to. It correctly reflects that no parameters are required.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'reusable blocks', with the parenthetical '(saved blocks)' clarifying the concept. It distinguishes from sibling write tools (create/update/delete) but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other read tools like get_block_types, so it's clear but not fully sibling-aware.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It is implied to be a simple read operation, but there are no explicit criteria, exclusions, or context clues to help an agent choose this over similar retrieval tools.

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