wordpress_duplicate_post

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only says 'duplicate' without explaining what is copied (content, metadata, media), whether the duplicate is a draft, if any permissions are needed, or what the response looks like. This leaves significant ambiguity.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words, but it is so sparse that it borders on under-specification. It could include more useful details without becoming wordy.

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?

Given two required parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description should explain the duplication semantics, return value, and required fields. It only covers a fragment of the necessary context.

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 description mentions 'new title' but incorrectly labels it as optional when the schema marks newTitle as required. It fails to explain postId at all, and with 0% schema coverage, this misleading and sparse parameter information is inadequate.

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 ('Duplicate'), the resource ('an existing post'), and the optional parameter ('new title'). This distinguishes it from create/update/delete operations, though 'optional new title' contradicts the schema requirement that newTitle is required.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool compared to alternatives like wordpress_create_post or wordpress_update_post. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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