find_posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state what is returned, whether multiple matches are possible, whether matching is exact or partial, how to interpret both slug and title being provided, or any limits or side effects.

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 concise sentence that states the core function without filler. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though the unexplained 'context' parameter means it is slightly too sparse to earn a 5.

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 is not complete for a tool with no output schema, no annotations, and four undocumented parameters. Missing elements include return semantics, relationship to sibling tools, exact matching behavior, and the role of the 'context' parameter. An agent would likely need additional information to invoke it correctly in ambiguous cases.

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 description adds meaning for slug, title, and status, which is necessary since schema description coverage is 0%. However, the 'context' parameter is completely unexplained, and status values are not enumerated or clarified, leaving a meaningful gap in parameter understanding.

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 action ('Find'), the resource ('WordPress posts'), and the lookup keys ('by slug or title'), with optional status filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_post, which appears to retrieve a single post directly.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use find_posts versus get_post, audit_slug_state, or resolve_duplicate_posts. There is no mention of use cases, exclusions, or alternative tools, so the agent must infer usage from the description alone.

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