wordpress_list_custom_posts

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses only the basic action (listing). Missing: read-only safety confirmation, pagination behavior (page/per_page), status filtering behavior, what return structure looks like, or rate limiting.

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?

Two sentences, logically ordered. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix wastes the first word of the description without adding meaning. Otherwise efficient structure with purpose first, then prerequisite.

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?

With 5 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks parameter details, return value explanation, and behavioral constraints needed for an agent to use this effectively.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description mentions 'custom post type' implying the post_type parameter, but provides no semantics for site (ID? URL?), per_page/page (pagination limits?), or status (possible values?). Fails to compensate for undocumented 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?

Clear verb (List) and resource (posts of specific custom post type). The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise without value. While it implies distinction from standard posts (sibling wordpress_list_posts), it doesn't explicitly name that alternative or clarify the boundary between 'posts' and 'custom posts'.

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?

Explicitly instructs to 'Use list_post_types first to discover available post types,' establishing a prerequisite workflow. However, it misses the opportunity to explicitly state when to use this versus wordpress_list_posts (standard posts) or wordpress_list_pages.

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