Today WP

Plugin facts

wp_plugin

Read-onlyIdempotent

Plugin facts from current WordPress.org data, dated. Use when choosing, keeping or comparing plugins (up to 3, by slug or name): installs, last update, tested WordPress version, PHP requirement and plain warnings, facts only. Premium and commercial ones (Gravity Forms, WPML, Elementor Pro) get their vendor and relation to a free plugin. For vulnerabilities against an installed version, use wp_security.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "plugin": "<plugin>"
    },
    "name": "wp_plugin"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plugin`	Yes	Plugin slug (e.g. "ai-engine") or name; several comma-separated to compare

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: data is dated, output is 'facts only' with plain warnings, premium/commercial plugins get vendor attribution and a relation to a free counterpart, and queries are capped at 3 plugins. It stops short of describing result shape or failure behavior for unknown slugs, which is why it is not a 5.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Dense but every clause carries information: source, freshness, use case, fields, premium handling, and the sibling routing hint. The scoping and sibling pointer are front-loaded, and there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does so by naming the specific fields an agent gets back. What is missing is edge-case behavior, such as what happens with an unrecognized slug or a name matching multiple plugins, plus whether responses are cached or paginated.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented with an example, so the baseline is already met. The description still adds meaning the schema does not enforce: a maximum of 3 plugins per call and the comparison intent, which shapes how an agent formats the comma-separated list.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States the resource (plugin facts), the source and freshness (current WordPress.org data, dated), and enumerates the returned fields: installs, last update, tested WordPress version, PHP requirement, warnings. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from wp_security, so an agent can choose between the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use frame (choosing, keeping or comparing plugins), a hard cap (up to 3, by slug or name), and names the alternative for a different job (wp_security for vulnerabilities against installed versions). Both the trigger and the exclusion are stated.

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

All Today WP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?