wp_move_widget

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds a valuable behavioral detail — 'position is a zero-based final index' — but it does not disclose the mutation's side effects on other widgets, persistence, or required permissions, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps for a write operation.

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?

Two short sentences, with the operation stated first and the key index semantics second. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete: it doesn't explain how to obtain valid widget/sidebar IDs, what the operation returns, or what happens during a dry run vs. a real move. The dry_run parameter is documented in the schema, but overall context is sparse.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It clarifies 'position' semantics beyond the schema, but leaves 'id' and 'sidebar' undefined; an agent is not told how to identify or discover valid widget and sidebar identifiers.

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 uses a specific verb ('Move') and resource ('widget') and adds the sidebar context, making the core operation clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling widget tools such as wp_update_widget or wp_delete_widget, but the repositioning focus is evident from the wording and the position parameter.

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 implies this tool is for repositioning a widget via 'Move and precisely order,' so an agent can infer the primary use case. It gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives, unlike a stronger definition that would direct users away from update/delete/create siblings.

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