Retrieve all WordPress roles and their capabilities to audit user permissions and plan access control.
List WordPress roles and their capabilities
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_list_roles"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals the main behavior (listing roles and their capabilities), but does not state that the operation is read-only/safe, what the exact return shape is, or whether any WordPress permissions are required. 'List' implies no side effects, but additional context would improve transparency.
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 no filler. Every word adds meaning, and it is appropriately sized for a tool of this simplicity.
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?
The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema), and the description states the core function and result. However, because there is no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context—such as confirming it returns the complete set of roles or noting that it is read-only—would make it fully complete for an agent. The current description is minimally viable but sparse.
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?
There are zero parameters, so the input schema is trivially complete (100% coverage). The description does not need to explain any parameter semantics; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('WordPress roles') plus the included detail ('their capabilities'). This makes the tool's function immediately clear and distinguishes it from sibling listing tools like wp_list_users or wp_list_themes by naming a unique resource category.
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 description offers no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives, no preconditions, and no exclusions. It only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name and sibling context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.