Retrieve detailed data for a single WordPress post, including metadata, content statistics, and management links, by specifying the target site for multi-site setups.
Retrieves detailed information about a single post including metadata, content statistics, and management links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | No | The ID of the WordPress site to target (from mcp-wordpress.config.json). Required if multiple sites are configured. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.9.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the shape of the return payload (metadata, content statistics, management links), which substitutes for the missing output schema, but says nothing about read-only safety, required capabilities, or behavior when the post ID is invalid or missing.
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 front-loaded sentence with verb and resource first and no wasted clauses. The trailing 'including ...' enumeration is justified because no output schema exists, though it is slightly list-like.
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 single-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials and even compensates for the absent output schema by naming what is returned. Missing only minor details such as error behavior for unknown post IDs.
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?
Only one parameter (`site`), and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema explaining the multi-site targeting rule. The description adds no parameter context, which is acceptable here since nothing is undocumented, but it earns no credit above the baseline.
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?
State a specific verb+resource ('Retrieves ... a single post') and enumerates the payload (metadata, content statistics, management links), which sets it apart from list-style siblings like wp_list_posts. It does not explicitly name the sibling alternatives (wp_get_post_revisions, wp_list_posts), so it stops short of a 5.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance at all: no statement of when to call this versus wp_list_posts for browsing or wp_get_post_revisions for revision history, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer the retrieval use case from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.