wp_get_page

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose an important behavioral trait: the return value is 'raw content with shortcodes visible,' which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not mention error behavior, authentication needs, or confirm that this is strictly non-mutating beyond the word 'Get.'

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 sentence that front-loads the primary purpose ('Get full content of a WordPress page by ID or slug') and adds one valuable detail about the return format. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 tool's simplicity and high schema coverage, the description is reasonably complete. It states what is returned ('full content', 'raw content with shortcodes visible'), which partially compensates for the missing output schema. It does not explain behavior when no parameter is provided or when multiple identifiers are passed, but this is a minor gap for a simple read 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that lookup is by ID or slug, which matches the schema, but it adds no extra meaning about the relationship between id, ref, and slug or how conflicts are resolved. It does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'WordPress page', and the lookup methods 'by ID or slug'. It is distinct from wp_get_post via the word 'page', but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools or mention alternatives. This fits 'clear but no sibling differentiation.'

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'by ID or slug'—an agent can infer this is for retrieving a single specific page. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this over wp_list_pages, wp_get_post, or other page-related tools, and no exclusions are stated.

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