wordpress_list_revisions

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation by using 'List', but does not disclose any additional behavioral aspects such as pagination, ordering, or whether the revisions include full content or just metadata. The output schema exists, so return value details are covered; the description adds minimal value beyond the read intent.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and well-structured with an Args and Returns section. Every line carries necessary information without verbosity, making it efficient and 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, clear output schema), the description is adequately complete. It states the action and the parameter meaning, and the output schema covers the return structure. It does not mention optional details like ordering or pagination, but these are not essential for a basic list operation and may be implied by the WordPress API context.

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 restates the parameter as 'post_id: Post ID', which merely repeats the schema property name and its obvious purpose. With schema description coverage at 0%, it does add a slight semantic hint that the ID refers to a post, but this is already clear from the parameter name. No additional format, validation, or usage details are provided.

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 'List' and the resource 'revisions for a WordPress post', which is specific and distinguishes it from get_revision (single revision) and list_page_revisions (page revisions) by implication. It does not explicitly name these alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous and directly tied to the tool name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools like get_revision or list_page_revisions. The description gives no context on use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer that it lists all revisions for a given post.

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