wordpress_get_table_previewPreview the first 10 rows of any database table to quickly inspect its contents.
Get preview of table data (first 10 rows by default)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| table | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Input schema / $schemaAdded value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseDoes the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the default row limit (10) but does not explain whether this is configurable (no limit parameter exists in schema), what order rows are returned in, or any error behavior. It also doesn't explicitly confirm the operation is read-only, though 'Get' implies it.
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?
The description is a single, concise sentence that directly conveys the core functionality. No filler or redundant information.
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?
Despite being a simple tool, the description is incomplete. The phrase 'by default' misleadingly suggests a configurable limit, but the schema only has 'table' with no limit parameter. It does not describe the return format, row ordering, or any prerequisites, leaving the tool underspecified for an agent to invoke correctly.
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?
The schema has one parameter 'table' with no description (0% coverage). The tool description does not compensate by explaining what 'table' refers to (e.g., table name, format, or that it must exist). This leaves the only parameter semantically undocumented.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get preview of table data (first 10 rows by default)'. This identifies the specific verb ('Get'), resource ('table data'), and default scope ('first 10 rows'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like wordpress_get_table_structure or wordpress_list_tables.
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?
The description implies the tool is for previewing data from a table, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like wordpress_execute_sql for complex queries. It lacks explicit exclusions but gives sufficient contextual direction for a simple preview use case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.