wp_snippet_listList bridge-stored PHP snippets with version, scope, and active status to manage custom WordPress behavior without editing theme files.
List PHP snippets stored by the bridge. Snippets are versioned PHP blocks with a scope (init, admin_init, wp_head, wp_footer, manual) and an active flag — the safe way to add behaviour without editing theme files.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
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 structurally. The description adds real domain context (versioned blocks, scope enum values, active flag) that tells the agent what a listed item represents, but it says nothing about ordering, pagination, or result size — minor gaps given the safety profile is already disclosed.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. The second sentence is partly domain education rather than invocation-critical information, but it is short and directly supports interpreting the result, so it still earns its place.
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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the concept model (scope values, active flag) an agent needs to reason about results. It stops short of describing what a returned record looks like or how results are ordered, which would be the only remaining gap.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden and the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain arguments, and none are omitted.
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?
Names a specific verb+resource ('List PHP snippets stored by the bridge') and then defines what a snippet actually is (versioned PHP blocks with a scope and active flag), so the agent understands the domain object without opening anything else. The read-only retrieval framing is unmistakable against wp_snippet_save/wp_snippet_run/wp_snippet_delete.
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 contextualizes snippets as 'the safe way to add behaviour without editing theme files', which implies the intended workflow, but it never states when to call this versus wp_snippet_run or wp_snippet_save, nor any prerequisite such as inspecting snippets before running one. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.