Create a new WordPress post by supplying a title and content. Set status, excerpt, and other fields to publish or save as draft via the WordPress REST API.
Add a new WordPress post
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | Post title | |
| status | No | Post status | |
| content | Yes | Post content | |
| excerpt | No | Post excerpt |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state whether the post is published or saved as a draft by default, what permissions are required, or how the new post is returned or identified after creation. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.
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 short sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no wasted words. It is perhaps too terse to earn a 5, but nothing in it is extraneous.
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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a status parameter whose default is unstated, the description omits details an agent needs to invoke it correctly. It does not say which fields are required or what the default publishing behavior is.
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 all four parameters (title, status enum, content, excerpt) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format, default, or constraint detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 (add) and resource (WordPress post), which is enough to separate it from wp_add_page and wp_add_media at the name level. However, the description itself does not call out what distinguishes a post from a page, so the differentiation relies on the tool name rather than the prose.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus wp_add_page, wp_posts_search, or wp_update_post. There is no mention of preconditions or exclusions, leaving an agent to infer usage purely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.