wp_get_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and 'Retrieves' only weakly implies a safe read. It omits what happens for an invalid or missing ID, whether authentication is required, and how the 'site' targeting behaves when multiple sites are configured.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb and lookup key come first. It is efficient, though its terseness is closer to under-specification than to disciplined brevity.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage this is minimally adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the agent still lacks any sense of the returned page shape or failure behavior, which the description could have supplied in one clause.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters (id, site) are documented in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates the ID lookup ('by its ID') and adds nothing about the site parameter's fallback behavior, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (retrieves) and resource (a single page) plus the lookup key (ID), so an agent immediately knows this is a point-read rather than a list. However, it offers no differentiation from adjacent siblings such as wp_get_page_revisions, wp_list_pages, or wp_get_post, which an agent could plausibly confuse it with.

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 gives no when-to-use context: it does not say to call wp_list_pages first to discover an ID, nor when to prefer wp_get_page_revisions over this tool. Nothing is said about prerequisites or exclusions, leaving routing entirely to inference from the name.

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