wordpress_update_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states that the tool updates a page, but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, rate limits, error conditions, or response structure.

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 concise: a single sentence with a clear action and a list of updateable fields. It is front-loaded and efficient, though could be slightly more structured.

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 9 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It misses parameter formats, required parameters (site, page_id are not mentioned), and does not explain return values.

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 description lists the main updatable fields (title, content, status, etc.), adding meaning beyond the bare schema names. However, it does not explain formats (e.g., meta as string or JSON), value constraints (e.g., status options), or required parameters like site and page_id.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'an existing WordPress page', and lists specific fields that can be updated (title, content, status, slug, parent page, featured image, and post meta). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wordpress_create_page or wordpress_delete_page.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. Among many WordPress sibling tools, there is no contextual advice.

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