wp_posts_get_revisions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly states 'Read-only' and describes the return fields (id, parent post id, author, dates, rendered content). It does not cover limitations like pagination or permissions, but for a read-only list this is sufficient.

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 two short sentences with front-loaded purpose, followed by return details and a read-only note. Every clause contributes value with no 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool without an output schema, the description adequately covers the operation, return fields, and safety trait. It lacks explicit comparison to sibling tools but is otherwise complete for its simplicity.

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 has a single post_id parameter with 0% description coverage. The description's 'of a post' directly maps to post_id, clarifying that it is the post whose revisions are fetched. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type and constraint.

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?

Description uses a specific verb 'List' with resource 'revisions of a post', clearly identifying it as a listing operation. It distinguishes from sibling tools like wp_posts_get_revision (singular) and wp_posts_restore_revision by focusing on plural revisions.

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 intended use is implied by the action described, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wp_posts_get_revision or wp_posts_restore_revision. No exclusions or conditional advice are provided.

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