Skip to main content
Glama
ttpears

mediawiki-mcp

by ttpears
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get-category-members

List pages, subcategories, or files within a MediaWiki category and return their titles and IDs. Filter by type to focus results on pages, subcategories, or files.

Instructions

List all pages, subcategories, or files within a specific category. Returns member titles and IDs. Use type to filter (page/subcat/file).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoFilter by member type
wikiNoWiki name (uses default if omitted)
limitNoMaximum number of members
categoryYesCategory name (with or without "Category:" prefix)
continue_fromNoContinuation token for pagination

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv2.3.2

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the return shape (titles and IDs) and the aggregation nature, which is useful, but it says nothing about pagination behavior (limit default 50, continue_from), read-only safety, or permission requirements.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no obvious padding. The type-filter sentence slightly repeats the enum already in the schema, but the size is appropriate for the tool.

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 listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filter, and return content adequately. The main omission is pagination behavior, which an agent might want when results are truncated.

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema, and the type enumeration is duplicated rather than extended. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (members of a category), enumerating the member kinds (pages, subcategories, files). This clearly distinguishes it from list-categories and get-page, though it doesn't name those siblings explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"Use type to filter (page/subcat/file)" gives implied usage for one parameter, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over list-categories, search-page, or get-page, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools