wordpress_create_page

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

Given the absence of annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, side effects, or required permissions. It only states the tool 'creates' a page, but does not discuss potential errors, rate limits, or the impact of the 'status' parameter (defaulting to draft). The supported features list is helpful but incomplete for full transparency.

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 very brief, with only one sentence and a '[UNIFIED]' prefix that adds noise. It is concise but sacrifices necessary detail. The structure is simple and front-loaded, but every word counts and the prefix is unnecessary.

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 (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return value, error handling, or parameter formats. The agent would lack crucial information to correctly invoke the tool, especially for required parameters like site and title.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It only mentions 'HTML content, parent pages, and custom slugs', mapping to content, parent, and slug parameters, but omits site, title, and status. It does not clarify that site is required or the meaning of the status field, leaving significant gaps.

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 identifies the tool as creating a new WordPress page, which is specific and resource-oriented. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like wordpress_create_post or wordpress_create_custom_post, which also create content but for different post types.

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, such as when to create a page instead of a post. It only lists supported features (HTML content, parent pages, custom slugs) without explaining the context or prerequisites.

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