Wistia MCP Server

List Subfolders

list_subfolders

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all subfolders inside a specified Wistia folder using its folder ID, with paging and sorting options for folder organization.

Instructions

Lists subfolders in a specific folder.

Requires api token with one of the following permissions

Read all folder and media data

Tokens with the "Act with a team member's permissions" permission (all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope) can also be used. Requests made with such a token are authorized using the permissions of the contact assigned to the token.

An expiring access token created with the all:delegate_to_contact_permissions scope and an authorization naming this folder (any permission) can also be used; it lists the folder's subfolders. Read-only account operation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	The page number to retrieve. This cannot be combined with `cursor`, pagination.
`cursor`	No	If `cursor[enabled]` is set to 1 then cursor pagination is enabled and the first set of records are fetched up to the `per_page`. Cursor pagination will also be turned on if `cursor[before]` or `cursor[after]` are set. Records returned will have a `cursor` property set which can be used to fetch more records in the same `sort_by` ordering. The cursor value of the last record can be used to fetch records after the current result set and the cursor of the first record can be used to fetch records before the result set. NOTE: a cursor value is only valid if the `sort_by` value hasn't changed from the last fetch. For example, you cannot fetch using `sort_by` id and then pass that cursor value to a `sort_by` name.
`account`	No	Named private Wistia account; selects credentials, not a remote account ID.
`sort_by`	No	Field to sort by. When using cursor pagination (see cursor param), only `id` is supported.	position
`per_page`	No	The number of medias per page. Use this for both offset pagination and cursor pagination.
`all_pages`	No	Read bounded page/per_page pages; each request consumes API quota. Not a snapshot or guaranteed complete backup.
`folder_id`	Yes	The hashed ID of the folder
`max_items`	No	Maximum returned records with all_pages=true, default 1000. At most 100 requests; output includes continuation state.
`hashed_ids`	No	Filter subfolders by their hashed IDs
`sort_direction`	No	Sort direction (0 = desc, 1 = asc; default is 1)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful authorization context — required permissions, delegation scope, and expiring token support — which goes beyond the annotations. It also states 'Read-only account operation,' reinforcing the annotation. It doesn't cover rate limits or pagination behavior, but with annotations carrying the core behavioral traits, this is solid.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, but the subsequent authentication block is lengthy and verbose with boilerplate about token scopes. It's not wasteful per se, but the structure buries the simple purpose under a wall of auth details.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only list operation with a rich input schema (10 params, 100% coverage) and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. The main missing piece is guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like list_folders, but for a straightforward list operation, that's a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents all 10 parameters, including pagination, sorting, and filtering. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Lists subfolders in a specific folder.' This is clear and distinguishable from siblings like list_folders (which lists top-level folders) and get_subfolder (which retrieves a single subfolder). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from those siblings in the text.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides detailed authentication and permission requirements, but gives no guidance on WHEN to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_folders or get_subfolder. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or routing cues for tool selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server