Search WordPress posts by keyword and status, then page through results with pagination controls.
Search and filter WordPress posts with pagination
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| search | No | Search query | |
| status | No | Post status | publish |
| per_page | No | Items per page |
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 says 'with pagination' but doesn't describe pagination behavior (defaults, limits, max per_page), result ordering, or what the return array contains. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is thin.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and scope. Very efficient, though minimal to the point of under-specification.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and only brief param schema coverage, the description does little to explain what the tool returns or how results are organized. It should do more to compensate for the missing structured context.
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 each parameter is already documented in the schema with descriptions and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the 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 (search/filter) and resource (WordPress posts), which distinguishes it from wp_get_post and the mutation siblings (wp_add_post, wp_update_post, wp_delete_post). It doesn't explicitly distinguish from wp_pages_search, but the resource name 'posts' vs 'pages' is self-evident.
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, no mention of alternatives, no exclusions. An agent gets no help deciding between this and wp_pages_search or wp_get_post.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.