wp_delete_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does reveal the key behavioral distinction between trashing (default) and permanent deletion (force:true), which is valuable. However, it omits prerequisites, return behavior, and potential side effects, leaving notable gaps for a destructive tool.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and resource. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should also cover return behavior, the meaning of ref, and any prerequisites. It does cover the trash-versus-force distinction but leaves these operational details unspecified, making it incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 to force by explaining that force:true permanently deletes, which the schema does not convey. It does not clarify the ref parameter, and dry_run already has a schema description, so overall parameter coverage remains partial given the 33% schema description 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 uses specific verbs ('Trash', 'permanently delete') and names the resource ('WordPress post'), while also distinguishing the two modes of operation. This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear and sets it apart from sibling deletion tools for other content types.

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 clear context on when to use the tool: when you need to trash or permanently delete a WordPress post. It contrasts the default trash behavior with force:true, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not conditions.

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