Retrieve general settings for a WordPress site to inspect configuration values and support multi-site administration.
Retrieves the general settings for a WordPress site.
| 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?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a retrieval operation but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what format the settings are returned in. For a read operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the essential information.
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 read operation with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should ideally provide more context about what 'general settings' includes and the return format. The description meets basic requirements but leaves the agent guessing about the output structure.
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?
The description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema (which has 100% coverage). The schema fully documents the single optional 'site' parameter with its purpose and requirement condition. The description doesn't provide additional context about parameter usage or semantics.
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 clearly states the verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('general settings for a WordPress site'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like wp_update_site_settings, but the verb 'retrieves' vs 'updates' provides implicit 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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of when this tool is appropriate versus other settings-related tools or what prerequisites might be needed. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.