wp_search_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns only a lightweight result shape (id, title, url, type, subtype) and directs users to fetch full content separately. It implies a read-only operation and does not discuss permissions or pagination, but the disclosed behavior is clear and honest.

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 three sentences with no redundancy: the first sentence states the purpose and endpoint, the second describes the return shape, and the third covers filtering and alternatives. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is fairly complete for a search tool. It covers scope, result format, filtering, and follow-up actions, but omits details like pagination parameters and sorting behavior. Overall, it provides enough context for correct tool selection and invocation.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains the meaning of 'query' and 'type' (with defaults and enum options), but does not elaborate on 'page', 'per_page', or 'subtype'. This provides partial parameter semantics but not complete coverage.

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 defines the tool as a full-text search across posts, pages, custom post types, and terms, and explicitly mentions the WP /wp/v2/search endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list or retrieve specific posts/pages, and it specifies the lightweight result shape.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: it mentions the default search target (type=post), allows filtering by type=term, and directs users to wp_posts_get / wp_pages_get for richer content. This clearly indicates when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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