wp_update_category

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the tool's purpose. It does not explain mutation side effects, whether unspecified fields are preserved, how dry_run behaves, permission requirements, or what the response contains.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. One short sentence cannot support a six-parameter mutation tool.

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?

Given six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this one-sentence description is severely incomplete. An agent has no way to know how to correctly configure the update, what fields are supported, or what outcome to expect.

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 description coverage is very low (17%), with only dry_run described in the schema. The description adds no information about properties like name, slug, parent, or description, and does not compensate for the fact that most parameters are undocumented.

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 a clear verb ('Update') and resource ('a WordPress category'), so an agent can tell it is for modifying existing categories rather than creating or deleting them. However, it does not explicitly differentiate among sibling update tools (e.g., wp_update_tag, wp_update_post) beyond the resource name.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wp_create_category, wp_ensure_category, or wp_delete_category. The intended use is only implied by the word 'Update'; there are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or recommended alternatives.

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