Duplicate a post or page

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

Annotations only say this is a non-idempotent, non-destructive write; the description adds substantial context beyond that: which fields are copied, which are never copied (credentials, edit lock, former slugs, caches, other plugins' protected keys), capability gating (unfiltered_html for builder markup), builder key atomicity, Elementor id renewal, and password-protection rules. It also discloses the return shape, which no output schema provides.

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 purpose is front-loaded correctly, but the body is a single dense run-on cramming taxonomy terms, builder behavior, capability gating, exclusions, and return shape into one sentence chain. The content mostly earns its place, but scanning it for the relevant clause is hard.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers permissions, exactly what will and will not be carried over, edge cases (media, password-protected posts, revisions), and the return payload. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and predict the outcome.

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 single `id` parameter is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds only that the caller needs read rights on the original and the ability to create entries of its type, which is permission context rather than parameter meaning.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: copy an existing post or page into a new draft, with the original unchanged. It distinguishes the operation from wp_create_post or wp_get_post by making clear it produces a new draft derived from an existing entry, not a fresh record or a read.

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 states the intended scenario (a starting point for a new page) and the key behavioral premise that each call creates another copy while the original is untouched. It does not name siblings such as wp_create_post or say when not to use it, so there is no explicit alternative routing.

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