Skip to main content
Glama

WordPress: List comments

wordpress_list_comments
Read-only

Retrieve paginated WordPress comments with author, content, and moderation status; filter by site, post, or approval status to review and manage discussions.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] List WordPress comments. Returns paginated list of comments with author, content, and moderation status.

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": {
      "site": "<site>"
    },
    "name": "wordpress_list_comments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
siteYes
statusNoapprove
post_idNo
per_pageNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.13.1
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv3.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are paginated and lists the returned fields — useful, but it says nothing about ordering, total counts, or the default moderation-status filter behavior.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then the return shape. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise, but otherwise no wasted wording.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no output schema and zero schema description coverage on the inputs, the description should explain what each filter does and the effect of the 'approve' default. It leaves an agent guessing which parameters are needed to scope results to a post or a moderation state.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for five undocumented parameters — including a non-obvious default of status='approve' and a string-typed post_id. The description only gestures at pagination and never mentions site, status, or post_id, leaving the most consequential filters unexplained.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('List WordPress comments') plus what the result contains (author, content, moderation status). It doesn't distinguish itself from siblings like wordpress_list_posts or the gitea comment listers, but purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus wordpress_list_posts, the gitea comment tools, or any moderation-oriented alternative. The reader must infer usage entirely from the name.

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