Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wp-ssh-mcp

wp-ssh-mcp

by MSSOFTPC
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

term_list

term_list
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists taxonomy terms for a WordPress site, defaulting to categories, so you can inspect available terms before assigning or managing content.

Instructions

List taxonomy terms.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "term_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
taxonomyNoTaxonomy, default category

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context of its own — nothing about pagination, result ordering, hierarchy, or whether an unknown taxonomy errors or returns empty.

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than optimal density.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter, read-only list tool with annotations and no output schema, the definition is minimally sufficient to call it. Still missing is any hint about what a term record looks like or how a missing taxonomy is handled, which leaves the agent guessing at results.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single 'taxonomy' parameter is documented with its default ("default category"), so the schema carries the burden. The description contributes no additional meaning about accepted values or behavior for the parameter, which matches the baseline 3 for a fully documented single-param schema.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("List taxonomy terms"), so the basic operation is unambiguous. However, it adds nothing about scope or return content, and among many sibling list tools (post_list, menu_list, media_list, theme_list) there is no differentiation beyond the resource noun itself.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many other list tools, no prerequisites, and no note about when a caller would want terms from a specific taxonomy. The agent must infer all usage context from the name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools