AutoWP MCP Server

set-featured-image

Assign a media item as the featured image for a WordPress post using the post ID and media ID.

Instructions

Assign a featured image to a WordPress post

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": {
      "postId": "<postId>",
      "mediaId": "<mediaId>"
    },
    "name": "set-featured-image"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`postId`	Yes	ID of the post to update
`mediaId`	Yes	ID of the media item to set as featured image

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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. It only states the action without mentioning potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing featured image), required permissions, or what happens on failure. This is a minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, well-structured sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple tool, front-loading the action and object clearly.

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?

The tool is simple with only two well-documented parameters, making the description minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about return values, error behavior, or preconditions (e.g., whether media must be attached to the post), so completeness is only average.

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?

The input schema documents both parameters (postId and mediaId) with full coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter-level detail. The description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description 'Assign a featured image to a WordPress post' uses a specific verb ('assign') and resource ('featured image') that clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like upload-media or update-post. It unambiguously states the tool's core function.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as edit-media-metadata or update-post. There are no mentions of prerequisites (e.g., post existence, media upload) or situations where this tool is preferred.

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