List posts or pages

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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already present in annotations, the description adds useful default behavior: it returns compact rows and omits full content unless otherwise requested. It does not describe pagination behavior or permission needs, but the annotation coverage lowers the bar.

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?

Three tight sentences with no waste. The default return behavior is front-loaded, and the routing to wp_content_get follows immediately.

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 13-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the key list-vs-get distinction and default compact return, but it leaves out filter meanings, pagination details, and compact-row field structure. It is minimally sufficient but has clear gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 46% across 13 parameters, so the description must compensate, but it only says 'with filters' and 'no full content' generically. It does not clarify filter semantics, pagination, ordering, or most parameters, adding little 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 uses a specific verb+resource ('List content with filters') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling retrieval tool by saying to use wp_content_get for the body. An agent can identify the tool's core purpose without opening either schema.

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 names the alternative for full body retrieval ('Use wp_content_get for the body') and implies the default compact-list context. However, it does not explain when to use include_content instead of wp_content_get, nor does it state when not to use this listing tool.

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