List WooCommerce coupons for a WordPress site, with pagination and search filters to find specific discount codes.
List WooCommerce coupons
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| site | Yes | Site id (see list_sites) | |
| search | No | ||
| per_page | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.4.0Input schema / properties / siteAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Site id (see list_sites)",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredAdded value: +[
+ "site"
+]v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that this is a read-only list operation, nor does it mention pagination behavior, filtering options, required permissions, or the shape of returned data. It adds essentially no behavioral context.
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 short sentence with no wasted words, so it is concise and front-loaded. However, this brevity is achieved through under-specification rather than efficient information delivery.
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 list tool with a required site parameter, filtering (search), and pagination (page, per_page), the description is far too sparse. With no annotations and no output schema, the agent lacks critical context about how to invoke the tool correctly or what to expect.
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?
Four parameters exist with only 25% schema description coverage (only 'site' is documented). The description mentions no parameters at all, so it completely fails to compensate for the low coverage—nothing about page, search, or per_page is explained.
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 'List WooCommerce coupons' simply restates the tool name (woo_list_coupons). It states a verb and resource but adds no scope details (e.g., filtering, pagination) or differentiation from sibling coupon tools like woo_get_coupon or woo_create_coupon.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as woo_get_coupon (for a single coupon) or other list tools. The description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.