wordpress_get_pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'hierarchy and ordering' as output features, which adds some context beyond a basic 'get' operation. However, it fails to describe critical behaviors like whether this is a read-only operation (implied but not stated), pagination handling (via parameters), authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps.

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 extremely concise with a single phrase ('Get pages with hierarchy and ordering'), which is front-loaded and wastes no words. Every element (verb, resource, features) earns its place, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 complexity (a retrieval tool with 2 parameters), no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameters, behavioral traits, output format (beyond mentioning hierarchy/ordering), and usage context. This makes it inadequate for the agent to fully understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 2 parameters (perPage, page) with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema provides no semantic details. The description does not mention these parameters at all, offering no compensation for the lack of schema documentation. This leaves the agent without guidance on what these parameters do or how to use them effectively.

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 'Get pages with hierarchy and ordering' states the action ('Get pages') and specifies two features ('hierarchy and ordering'), which gives a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what 'pages' refers to (WordPress pages vs other content) and doesn't clearly distinguish from sibling tools like 'wordpress_get_posts' or 'wordpress_search_posts', which also retrieve content. It avoids tautology by adding details beyond the name.

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 when to prefer it over 'wordpress_get_posts' for page-specific retrieval, when hierarchy/ordering is needed, or any prerequisites. Without such context, the agent lacks clear usage instructions.

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