wp_find_page

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

Explicitly declares 'Read-only', which is the most important behavioral trait and there are no annotations to rely on. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior, but no destructive behavior is implied.

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 brief and well structured, with the core purpose first, a read-only note, workflow guidance, and parameter definitions. No redundant or filler content.

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 includes the return fields (id, title, slug, status, type) and names the follow-up tools, which is useful given there is no output schema. It omits details like result limits or empty-result behavior, but the essential context for using this finder is present.

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?

Despite having no schema descriptions, the text explains both parameters: install is the WP Engine install name, and query is a simple search term. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the tool finds pages and posts matching a query, returning a merged set of id, title, slug, status, and type. It also explicitly positions the tool as a read-only locator for post_id to feed wp_extract_page or wp_edit_page, distinguishing it from related operations.

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?

Provides concrete usage direction: use it to locate the post_id for downstream extraction/edit tools and notes it is read-only. It does not explicitly enumerate when to avoid this tool in favor of alternative search/retrieval siblings, but the intended workflow is clear.

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