wordpress_export_content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool exports content but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it requires specific permissions, what happens during export (e.g., file generation, download), potential side effects (e.g., site performance impact), or error handling. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the key action and resource, making it immediately clear. Every part of the sentence ('Export posts/pages as WordPress XML') earns its place by specifying what is exported and the output format.

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 the tool has 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose but lacks details on behavior, output format beyond 'WordPress XML', or usage context. For a simple export tool, it's functional but could be more complete by adding context like export scope or file handling.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the lack of inputs. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and it appropriately doesn't mention any. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as no additional semantic information is required beyond the schema.

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 'Export posts/pages as WordPress XML' clearly states the action (export) and resource (posts/pages) with specific output format (WordPress XML). It distinguishes from siblings like 'wordpress_backup_database' or 'wordpress_import_content' by focusing on content export rather than database backup or import operations. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all possible export-like tools in the list.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing content to export), exclusions (e.g., not for media files), or direct alternatives like 'wordpress_full_backup' for comprehensive backups. Usage is implied from the name and description alone without explicit context.

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