List Ghost pages as summaries with NQL filters, sorting, and pagination to find and review site content.
List pages (summaries only). Supports Ghost NQL filters and pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| limit | No | Results per page (max 100) | |
| order | No | Sort order, e.g. "published_at desc" | |
| filter | No | Ghost NQL filter, e.g. "status:draft" or "tag:recipes+status:published" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that only summaries are returned and that pagination and NQL filtering are supported, but says nothing about permissions/auth needs, rate limits, ordering defaults, or what a page summary actually contains.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by capability notes. No filler, though it is arguably under-specified rather than a model of precision.
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 browse tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essentials but omits response-shape hints beyond 'summaries', sibling routing, and any behavioral constraints. Adequate minimum, with clear gaps.
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 baseline is 3. The description references pagination and NQL filtering, which maps to page/limit/filter, but adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema already documents (order parameter is not mentioned at all).
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List pages') and adds the scoping qualifier '(summaries only)', which meaningfully separates it from a full-content read. It stops short of naming the sibling it excludes (pages_read) or contrasting with posts_browse, so an agent must infer the distinction.
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?
'summaries only' implies this is the lightweight listing counterpart to pages_read, but the description never states when to use it versus pages_read or posts_browse. Usage is inferable, not explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.