WordPress MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, returns errors for invalid IDs, or includes metadata like post content or status. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every part ('Get a WordPress post by its ID') contributes directly to understanding the tool's function, making it optimally concise.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what data is returned (e.g., post content, author, date), error conditions, or authentication needs, leaving the agent with incomplete context for proper invocation.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'postId' documented as 'Post ID' with a minimum of 0. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or ID sources, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('a WordPress post by its ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'search-posts' or 'wordpress-block-types-schema', which prevents a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search-posts' or 'create-post'. It lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid post ID) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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