Retrieve a single WordPress post by its ID using the site URL and application password credentials. Use it to fetch post details for automation or AI workflows.
Get a single WordPress post by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| post_id | Yes | Post id | |
| site_url | Yes | WordPress site URL | |
| username | Yes | WordPress username | |
| app_password | Yes | WordPress application password |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.11Does 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implies a read but does not disclose required authentication (app_password visible in schema, not described), whether unpublished posts are returned, or what the response contains.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?
A single efficient sentence with the lookup key front-loaded. No waste, though it is arguably terse to the point of under-specification rather than truly concise.
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 single-resource getter with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits auth context and return-shape expectations that could help, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.
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 coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters including site_url, username, and app_password. The description only restates the 'by id' intent, adding nothing beyond the schema — baseline 3.
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 (Get) and resource (a single WordPress post) plus the key lookup key (id). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling wordpress_list_posts, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.
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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are offered. An agent can infer that this retrieves one post versus listing many, but the description never states that or points to wordpress_list_posts for the other case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.