wp_get_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It implicitly identifies this as a read operation ('retrieves'), but does not explicitly confirm it is non-destructive, lacks mentions of authentication or rate limits. The description is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 with two main sentences plus examples. It front-loads the core purpose. However, the examples could be integrated more succinctly. Still, it is efficient and avoids redundancy.

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 no output schema and moderate complexity (3 parameters, single post retrieval), the description covers what the tool returns (metadata, content stats, management links) and the optional behavior (include_content). It is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's function, though a bit more detail on the response format would enhance completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description needs to add value beyond schema. The description provides usage examples that illustrate parameter usage (e.g., --id=123, --include_content=true), but does not add new semantic details about the parameters themselves. Baseline 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 it retrieves detailed information about a single post, listing included elements (metadata, content statistics, management links) and an optional full HTML flag. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_get_page or wp_get_comment, which target different entities.

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?

Usage examples provide clear context for basic and content retrieval. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like wp_list_posts for multiple posts, nor any restrictions (e.g., post visibility, permissions). The guidance is implied but lacks explicit exclusions.

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