Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Frontman for WordPress

by io.github.frontman-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wp_list_options

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists non-sensitive WordPress options that can be read or modified via wp_get_option/wp_update_option, with their current values. Use wp_get_option for explicit reads of options omitted from bulk output.

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>"
    },
    "name": "wp_list_options"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idYesThe connected site's id returned by list_sites. Call list_sites first; do not use a URL or WordPress post ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: results include current values, results are filtered to non-sensitive options only, and the list is explicitly non-exhaustive so missing options must be fetched individually. No mention of pagination, but for a bulk read this is close to complete.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed immediately by the alternative-route rule. Every clause earns its place; a touch more detail on what 'non-sensitive' means would be a better use of space than anything currently present.

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 single-parameter read tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns (current values), what it excludes (sensitive options), and the fallback path for anything missing. Only the undefined boundary of 'non-sensitive' keeps it from being fully self-sufficient.

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

Parameters3/5

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

There is only one parameter and the schema describes it fully (site_id from list_sites, not a URL or post ID), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable since the schema carries that burden; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear specific verb and resource: lists WordPress options with their current values, and states the safety scoping ('non-sensitive'). It distinguishes itself from wp_get_option by naming that sibling as the path for options omitted from the bulk output. The only weakness is that 'non-sensitive' is left undefined, so the agent cannot predict what is excluded.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: bulk list here, explicit reads via wp_get_option for options missing from this output. It also implies the options returned are the ones eligible for wp_get_option/wp_update_option, linking to the write path. It does not state any prerequisite beyond the schema's site_id note, but that is already covered by the schema.

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

All Frontman for WordPress toolsInspect
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.

Resources