wp_media_listLists WordPress media attachments with pagination, optional MIME type filtering, and search so you can find and review uploaded files.
List attachments with optional MIME filter and search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| search | No | ||
| per_page | No | ||
| mime_type | No | e.g. image/jpeg |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that – no pagination behavior, default ordering, or result limits, despite per_page/page existing.
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?
A single tight sentence with no waste and the key filtering capability front-loaded. Its brevity is appropriate, though it is arguably too terse given the missing pagination details.
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?
For a read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. It omits pagination behavior and return shape, which matters since no output schema exists.
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?
Schema coverage is only 25% (only mime_type documented inline). The description compensates by naming the MIME filter and search, covering two of four parameters, but leaves page and per_page entirely unexplained in both places.
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?
'List attachments' gives a clear verb+resource, and 'attachments' is specific WordPress media terminology. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling wp_content_list, but the resource is unambiguous enough that an agent can identify it.
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 says nothing about when to use this versus wp_content_list, wp_media_upload, or wp_search. No prerequisites or context are given, leaving the agent to infer usage 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.