wp_update_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully explains that all fields except ID are optional and only provided fields are updated, and it shows how to remove a featured image. But it does not describe permissions, side effects, validation specifics, change-tracking behavior, or what happens on failure.

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 front-loaded with its core purpose and uses clear headings and bullets. However, it is verbose for a tool whose schema contains only one parameter, and the six CLI-style usage examples become repetitive rather than informative.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain permissions, side effects, validation outcomes, and return behavior. It gives some update semantics and examples, but omits these critical details and does not match the actual input schema.

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 input schema exposes only one parameter, 'site', and it is fully documented in the schema. The description does not mention 'site' at all, yet it discusses many parameters (id, title, content, status, categories, featured_media) that are absent from the schema. This mismatch is misleading rather than value-adding.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Updates an existing WordPress post.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_update_page or wp_create_post by resource and action.

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 usage examples and explains that only provided fields are updated, which implies how to use the tool. However, it never states when to choose this tool over alternatives such as wp_update_page, wp_create_post, or wp_delete_post, nor does it list prerequisites or exclusions.

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