wp_get_snapshot_diff

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Diff' implies a non-destructive read, but the description does not state what the output looks like (structured change list vs text diff), how errors are handled for invalid snapshot IDs, or whether it is safe to invoke freely.

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 efficient sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. The word 'MCP' is slightly redundant given the tool context, but the sentence earns its place and is easy to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter tool this is minimally adequate, but gaps remain: there is no output schema and no annotations, so the agent cannot anticipate the diff format or result structure. The phrase 'post content' also raises a scope question — whether this works only for posts or for pages/CPTs — that is left unresolved.

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% — snapshot_id is fully documented in the schema as 'MCP snapshot ID from activity log', which is genuinely helpful. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Diff') and a specific resource pair (MCP snapshot vs current post content), making the core operation unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from the closest sibling wp_get_revision_diff by referencing 'snapshot' rather than 'revision', though it doesn't explicitly call out the difference.

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 on when to use this tool versus its siblings. With wp_get_revision_diff, wp_get_activity_log, and wp_restore_snapshot all nearby, an agent gets no help choosing between comparing a snapshot and comparing a revision, or deciding when to diff versus restore.

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