wp_edit_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining side effects. It clearly discloses that the default behavior writes nothing, that dry_run=false only stages changes to a draft duplicate, that the live post is never directly written, and that prod writes require allow_prod=true.

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 dense but efficient, packing workflow, safety defaults, and prerequisites into a few sentences without redundant fluff. The parenthetical format keeps related information together and aids readability.

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 description provides strong workflow context, including the draft-duplicate mechanism, promotion via wp_publish_swap, builder requirements, and production safety guard. It does not describe the return value or error behavior, but this is partially mitigated by the detailed operational guidance.

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 provides no parameter descriptions, and the description only partially compensates. It explains dry_run, allow_prod, and enumerates the ops operation types, but it does not describe the structure of the operation dicts, nor does it explicitly explain install or post_id beyond their names. This leaves important parameter details unspecified.

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 edits an existing page via a draft duplicate and explicitly notes the live page is never written. It distinguishes itself from related tools like wp_publish_swap and wp_create_content by describing the edit-and-promote workflow.

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 gives concrete usage conditions: it requires a discovered profile (wp_discover_site) and an editable builder (Divi or Gutenberg), defaults to dry_run=true for previews, and explains that dry_run=false stages changes for later promotion with wp_publish_swap. This gives clear guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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