publish_article

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the credential requirement but does not explain side effects (e.g., article becoming publicly visible), reversibility, error behavior, or what the response indicates. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and target, appends a key prerequisite, and contains no filler words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool.

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 one-parameter publish action, the description covers the core action and a prerequisite, but it omits return behavior, success/failure semantics, and any guidance on typical workflow ordering. It is minimally viable but lacks contextual richness that would help an agent use it confidently without further exploration.

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 already documents article_id with 100% coverage, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that the article must be a 'generated article', which constrains the valid article_id beyond the schema's generic 'Article ID to publish'.

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 uses a specific verb ('Publish') and resource ('a generated article to WordPress'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like generate_article, get_article, and get_publish_status. The target platform (WordPress) adds useful scope.

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 gives one prerequisite ('requires WP credentials on the site') but does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as checking publish status with get_publish_status or updating an article before publishing. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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