mcp-wordpress

wp_users_list

Retrieve paginated WordPress users filtered by search, roles, or authors. Set context to edit for email, locale, and capabilities.

Instructions

List users. Filter by search text, roles (comma-separated array), who=authors (only users who have published posts). Context=edit returns email + locale + capabilities (requires manage_options).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wp_users_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`who`	No
`page`	No
`order`	No	asc
`roles`	No
`search`	No
`context`	No	view
`orderby`	No	name
`per_page`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that context=edit requires the manage_options capability and returns additional fields (email, locale, capabilities). However, it does not mention pagination behavior or explicitly confirm read-only status, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. The first sentence states the operation; the second packs filter semantics and permission info efficiently.

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?

Covers core listing semantics and key filters well, but for an 8-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, it omits explanation of pagination/ordering parameters and does not describe the default return structure for context=view. Some operational detail is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains the semantic effect of who=authors, roles format, and context=edit's return/permission implications. It leaves page, per_page, order, orderby undocumented, but their names and schema defaults provide reasonable clues.

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 opens with 'List users' – a clear verb+resource that distinguishes this from single-user tools like wp_users_get. It immediately enumerates filtering options, making it unambiguous that this is a collection listing endpoint.

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?

Describes specific filters (search, roles, who=authors) and explains the permission requirement for context=edit (requires manage_options). This gives clear context for when to use these options, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or when-not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server