WordPress MCP by InsightfulPipe

WordPress Setup Helper

query_contexts

Read-only

Helper for planning InsightfulPipe WordPress data queries.

Step 1: request='accounts' – Retrieve workspace_id, brand_id, AND available_actions.

Step 2: request='actions_details' with actions=['xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx', 'xxxxxx'] – REQUIRED before querying. Replace with actions from available_actions to get the exact request body, required identifiers, fields, time ranges, and notes for each action.

Optional: request='available_actions' – Standalone call to list all available tables/actions (already included in accounts response).

Optional: request='brands' with brand_id + workspace_id to pull brand guidelines.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "request": "<request>"
    },
    "name": "query_contexts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`actions`	No
`request`	Yes
`brand_id`	No
`platform`	No
`workspace_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Consistent with readOnlyHint=true — nothing implies mutation. It adds genuine context beyond annotations by describing what each request returns (workspace_id/brand_id/available_actions, and the request body, identifiers, fields, time ranges and notes from actions_details) and warns that step 2 is mandatory, which is real behavioral guidance.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded purpose followed by numbered steps is the right structure for a multi-call workflow, and each step earns its place. Minor waste in the parenthetical 'already included in accounts response' repeated alongside the optional-section note.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only, 5-param, multi-modal setup tool with an output schema (so return shapes needn't be spelled out), this is close to sufficient: the workflow order, required prerequisite, and downstream usage are all clear. The unmentioned 'platform' parameter is the one real gap, and no rate-limit or auth expectations are noted.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, and it mostly does: it enumerates the meaningful values of the request enum, explains the actions array's source and format, and states that brands needs brand_id plus workspace_id. The 'platform' parameter is never mentioned anywhere, leaving one of five params completely undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening line states the resource and role precisely: a setup/planning helper for InsightfulPipe WordPress data queries, not a query executor. The per-request breakdown (accounts, actions_details, available_actions, brands) makes the surface concrete and implicitly separates it from siblings like query_data and execute_action, though those siblings are never named.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit ordered workflow with a hard precondition ('actions_details ... REQUIRED before querying') and flags that available_actions is optional because it is already covered by the accounts response. It stops short of naming when to fall back to query_data or execute_action, so the routing around this tool is inferred rather than stated.

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

All WordPress MCP by InsightfulPipe tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.