wp_delete_page

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the most important trait for a destructive tool: default soft-delete to trash versus permanent deletion when force=true. It omits permission requirements, whether trashed pages are recoverable, and side effects such as orphaned children or menu references.

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?

A single tight sentence with the default behavior stated first and the destructive variant second. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 destructive tool with zero annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core trash-vs-permanent distinction but should say more: that force=true is irreversible, that the required site and id identify the target, and what happens to a page once trashed. It is adequate but clearly under-documented for the stakes.

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 100%, so id, site, and force are already documented in the schema, including force's 'Bypass trash and delete permanently'. The description's restatement of force adds no syntax or semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a page'), clearly separating it from the adjacent page tools like wp_get_page, wp_update_page, and wp_list_pages. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from wp_delete_post, the closest sibling, leaving the page-vs-post routing 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?

The parenthetical 'moves to trash, or permanently if force=true' implies the two operating modes an agent must choose between, which is useful guidance. But there is no explicit when-to-use instruction, no warning about irreversibility, and no pointer to any alternative such as wp_delete_post for non-page content.

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