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

Annotations only declare write/openWorld/non-destructive; the description adds the key behavioral guarantee that output is always a draft and only becomes public via another tool, plus the confirm-first requirement against the live site. That is material context an agent could not derive from the annotations alone.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the write tag and the draft-only constraint; nothing is padded. Slight redundancy with the schema's format description costs it a point.

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 an 8-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers safety, preconditions and content conversion well. It never indicates what the call returns (e.g. the new post ID needed downstream for publish/update), which an agent would have to discover.

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 100% and the schema's format field already spells out the markdown-to-blocks conversion in greater detail than the description does, so the description's conversion sentence is largely duplicative. No additional meaning is added for slug, excerpt, featured_media or type; baseline 3.

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?

"[WRITE] Create a new DRAFT post or page" gives a specific verb, resource and the two supported content types, and the DRAFT/never-public framing immediately separates it from wordpress_publish and wordpress_update_post. An agent can classify it without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly routes the publish step to wordpress_publish ("never public until wordpress_publish is called") and states the confirm:true precondition. It does not, however, warn against using it to modify an existing post (wordpress_update_post is a sibling), leaving that exclusion to inference.

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