wordpress_get_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'Get detailed information' without explaining what 'detailed' includes, whether any permissions are needed, what happens for invalid/missing IDs, or the return format. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation support.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place: 'Get detailed information about a specific post by ID'. It is as concise as possible while conveying the core action and target.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), but the description does not explain return values or behavior on missing posts. Since there is no output schema, the description should hint at what 'detailed information' includes, but it remains vague. For a low-complexity tool, it is adequate but not complete.

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 has zero description coverage for postId (just 'type: number'). The description's phrase 'by ID' adds the crucial meaning that postId is the WordPress post identifier, going beyond the schema. However, it does not elaborate on expected format or edge cases, so it only partially compensates for the schema's lack of description.

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 tool's action ('Get detailed information') and resource ('a specific post by ID'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like wordpress_get_posts (plural) and wordpress_get_post_revisions by emphasizing 'specific post by ID', making it unambiguous when this tool is the right choice.

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 implies usage context: when you have a specific post ID and need detailed information. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions where other tools should be used instead (e.g., wordpress_get_posts for listing). It is clear enough but lacks explicit exclusions, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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