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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety bar is lower. The description nonetheless adds the key consequence — this makes the item public on a live site — and the confirm gate the agent must satisfy before calling.

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 WRITE/makes-public warning front-loaded, followed immediately by the scheduling rule and the confirm gate. Nothing is wasted.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the definition covers mode selection and the confirmation requirement. It could say a bit more about what happens to already-published posts, but nothing essential for correct invocation 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 100% and each parameter is already self-documented. The description restates the date-scheduling behavior and the confirm requirement but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (publish) and resource (a draft post or page), and notes the schedule variant. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like wordpress_create_draft, wordpress_update_post and wordpress_delete_post.

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?

Explains the two modes — publish immediately or schedule by passing a future date — and flags the confirm:true precondition. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as wordpress_update_post for edits, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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