Skip to main content
Glama
cvrt-jh

wordpress-mcp

by cvrt-jh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

wp_get_media

Retrieve a WordPress media item by ID for a specified site to access its file details.

Instructions

Get a media item by ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMedia ID
siteYesSite id (see list_sites)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.4.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / site
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Site id (see list_sites)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "id"
-]New value: +[
+  "site",
+  "id"
+]
  2. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation but says nothing about permissions, error behavior (e.g., missing ID), response shape, or whether the item is returned in full or summary form.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It communicates the core action immediately and contains no redundant filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple (two required parameters, no output schema), and the schema fully covers those parameters. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least hint at return structure or site context; it leaves the agent to infer both.

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 both 'id' and 'site' are already documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond restating the ID concept, which is the expected baseline when schema coverage is complete.

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 ('Get') and resource ('media item') with the key identifier ('by ID'). Distinguishable from most siblings, but does not differentiate from the nearly identical 'mcp_get_media' or explain why an agent would choose one over the other.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as 'wp_list_media' or 'mcp_get_media'. The agent must infer context entirely.

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