wp_list_posts

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) already cover the safety profile. The description adds the return format details, which is useful but not extensive. It does not disclose behaviors like slug handling or additional filters, but given annotations, this is adequate.

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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences cover purpose, return fields, and usage. No wasted words, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with no output schema, the description provides essential details: what it does, what it returns, and when to use it. The schema and annotations cover the remaining specifics, making it complete for agent selection and invocation.

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 has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three optional parameters (search, status, per_page). The description adds little beyond echoing the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists WordPress posts with optional filters, and identifies the return fields (post ID, title, status, date, categories). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_list_pages or wp_list_media, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly says to use for browsing existing content or finding posts by keyword, providing clear context. However, it does not directly mention when not to use it or alternatives like wp_get_post for single post retrieval, so it lacks exclusions and alternative comparison.

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