wp_posts_schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals the write nature (status set to 'future'), the validation requirement (future date), and the authorization requirement (publish tier). It doesn't mention reversibility or output, but for a simple scheduling operation, this is sufficient and adds practical context.

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 compact, consisting of three short sentences, each adding value: purpose, constraint, and permission. It is front-loaded and avoids redundancy, achieving maximum clarity with minimal words.

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?

The description covers the core purpose, validation, and permission, but it doesn't explain the 'id' parameter semantics or what the response will be. Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, these gaps reduce completeness, as an agent still might not know exactly how to pass the post identifier.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It adequately explains the 'date' parameter (must be in the future) but fails to describe the 'id' parameter, which is critical—the agent cannot infer from the description that 'id' refers to the post ID. This is a significant omission.

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 tool's function: scheduling a post for future publication by setting status to 'future' and a date. This distinguishes it from siblings like wp_posts_publish or wp_posts_update, as it specifically targets future scheduling while mentioning the underlying mechanism.

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 description implies when to use this tool (scheduling posts with a future date) and provides a clear constraint ('The date must be in the future') and a prerequisite ('Requires publish tier'). It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references, but the context is clear and actionable.

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