Retrieve a single WordPress page by ID from a specified site, optionally including full content for review or editing.
Get a single page by ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Page ID | |
| site | Yes | Site id (see list_sites) | |
| content | No | Include full content |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.4.0Input schema / properties / siteAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Site id (see list_sites)",
+ "type": "string"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "id"
-]New value: +[
+ "site",
+ "id"
+]v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It indicates a read operation but does not mention that the optional content flag defaults to false, nor does it describe permissions, rate limits, or output behavior.
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 front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It states the core action and scoping constraint immediately.
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 simple get-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits the behavioral effect of the content flag and gives no indication of what the returned page object contains.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, not even referencing the optional content parameter.
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 gives a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('page') scoped by ID. It does not, however, differentiate itself from siblings like wp_get_post or clarify why one would use it over wp_list_pages.
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 phrase 'by ID' implies the tool is for retrieving a single page when its identifier is known, providing some usage context. It does not state when to choose this over alternatives such as wp_list_pages or wp_search_posts.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.