Get Raw Block Content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable context: it specifies the REST context=edit, the admin permission requirement, and the exact return structure. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose and usage in the first three sentences. The Args section is redundant with the schema but still concise and readable. No wasted sentences beyond the duplication.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully specifies the return object and its fields. It covers the raw source distinction, the write-back workflow, and the admin requirement, making it complete for a read-only single-item tool with full schema coverage and annotations.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The description's Args section restates parameter info without adding new meaning beyond the schema. Since the schema already explains defaults, enums, and formats, the description adds no significant semantic value.

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 clearly states the tool reads a page/post's RAW Gutenberg block markup, using a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('page/post RAW block markup'), and explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools wp_get_page/wp_get_post by noting they strip away the raw source.

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use to inspect and transform page content, then write it back with wp_update_page.' It also contrasts with alternatives (wp_get_page/wp_get_post) and mentions the admin requirement, giving clear when-to-use guidance.

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