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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, the description discloses the plugin dependency, the exact returned field set (element_id, element_type, field, text), and concrete failure modes with retry guidance (wp_timeout, wp_unreachable). That is real behavioral context an agent cannot get from annotations.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and the wp_get_post comparison, then handles return shape, prerequisite, parameters, and errors in short lines. Dense but every line carries information; only the error/parameter lines could be tightened slightly.

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 read-only two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the remaining gaps: why this tool exists alongside wp_get_post, plugin prerequisite, output field semantics, and error/retry behavior. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, so the description carries the burden and does: post_id is described as the numeric post/page ID obtainable from wp_list_posts, and workspace is explained as a customer slug that is optional when only one workspace exists. Minor tension: schema types post_id as string while the text says 'numerisch', but the meaning is still clear.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: reads Elementor/Bricks page-builder content as a text tree. It explicitly distinguishes itself from wp_get_post (which returns empty content for builder pages) and names the downstream sibling wp_builder_replace_text that consumes its output addresses.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition (pages whose content lives in builder meta, so wp_get_post comes back empty) and points to the complementary tool wp_builder_replace_text. Prerequisites (Honeyfield connector plugin, verifiable via wp_bridge_status) are also named.

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