wordpress_list_page_revisions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether revisions are returned in chronological order, whether the page must exist, or any error conditions. The description is minimal and lacks detail beyond the basic action.

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 and front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes a simple Args and Returns section, which is clear. However, it is slightly under-specified, but for a simple tool it is appropriately sized.

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 tool has an output schema (though not shown in detail), the description need not explain return values. However, with no annotations and minimal description, it lacks context about usage, prerequisites, or behavior. It is adequate for a simple list operation but could be more complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description does mention 'page_id: Page ID' which adds a tiny bit of meaning. However, it does not explain the format, constraints, or how the page_id is used beyond the schema. With only one parameter, the description adds minimal value.

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 revisions for a WordPress page, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like wordpress_list_revisions (which likely lists revisions for posts) by specifying '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 that it is specific to pages, nor does it contrast with wordpress_list_revisions or wordpress_get_revision. The context is implied by the name and description but not explicit.

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