Skip to main content
Glama
alokemajumder

wpxmcp

by alokemajumder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Discover content types

discover_content_types
Read-only

List all WordPress content types with REST base, hierarchy, taxonomies, and field support before working with an unfamiliar site. Identifies types hidden from REST (show_in_rest=false) to avoid integration issues.

Instructions

List every content type registered on the site — post, page, and any custom post type — with its REST base, whether it is hierarchical, which taxonomies apply, and which fields it supports. Call this before working with an unfamiliar site: a type absent here is registered with show_in_rest => false and cannot be reached over REST at all.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_idNoWhich configured WordPress site to act on. Optional — with a single site configured it is used automatically; with several, the default site is used unless you name one. Run list_sites for valid ids.
include_countsNoAlso report how many items exist per type. Costs one extra request per type.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already convey readOnly and non-destructive behavior. The description adds non-obvious context: a type missing from this list has show_in_rest => false and is unreachable over REST. This is exactly the kind of behavioral insight that goes beyond structured fields.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and output fields; the second delivers usage guidance. Every clause contributes meaning.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple read-only discovery tool, this is complete: the returned fields are enumerated, the parameters are fully documented in the schema, annotations cover the safety profile, and the usage context is explicit. No critical information an agent needs is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (site_id and include_counts) thoroughly. The tool description does not need to restate them, and it adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource ('every content type registered on the site') with concrete examples (post, page, custom post type). It also enumerates what is returned, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like discover_taxonomies or list_content.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives an explicit trigger: 'Call this before working with an unfamiliar site.' It also explains the consequence of a type being absent, which is strong practical guidance. It does not name alternatives or explicitly say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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