Today WP

WordPress and PHP security

wp_security

Read-onlyIdempotent

WordPress, PHP, plugin and theme updates and security in one call, with dated, sourced answers. Use when the user asks if a site is safe or up to date, or before advising on updates or hosting: pass the site's WordPress and PHP versions, plugins and themes (slug:version or the wp plugin list / wp theme list output) to get an ordered urgent list (what to update or replace first), known vulnerabilities that hit the installed versions, and which WordPress and PHP branches still get fixes. Compares versions with public records; it does not scan the site.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wp_security"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`php`	No	The PHP version a site runs, e.g. "8.1.30": says if that branch still gets security fixes (a plugin's minimum PHP can be checked here too, as a branch status)
`themes`	No	The site's themes: "astra:4.6, twentytwentyfive:1.2", or the raw output of `wp theme list --fields=name,status,version --format=csv`. Up to 10. Checked for known vulnerabilities against the installed version.
`plugins`	No	The site's plugins: "akismet:5.3, contact-form-7:6.0.1, woocommerce", or the raw output of `wp plugin list --fields=name,version,status,update_id --format=csv` (or --format=json) pasted as is. Up to 60. Plugins outside WordPress.org (premium, commercial) are checked under their own slug; must-use plugins are skipped and listed.
`wordpress`	No	The WordPress version a site runs, e.g. "6.8.2": says if that branch still gets security fixes. Not a plugin's minimum requirement: for what changed since a version, use wp_now with since

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it explains the data source ('dated, sourced answers', 'public records'), the output shape ('an ordered urgent list', known vulnerabilities, branch support), and an important limitation ('it does not scan the site'). These details materially help an agent understand what the tool will and will not do.

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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loads its purpose before usage guidance. The second sentence is dense with nested clauses and parenthetical examples, which slightly reduces scannability, but no sentence is wasted.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a multi-input security assessment tool with no output schema, the description explains inputs, outputs, limitations, and an alternative path. An agent has enough context to decide to call it and to assemble the expected version/plugin/theme inputs.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters in detail. The description reinforces the expected input forms such as slug:version and raw CLI output, but it adds little parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides and does not explain what happens when optional inputs are omitted.

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?

The description states a specific combined purpose: WordPress, PHP, plugin and theme update and security assessment against public records. It clearly distinguishes the tool from a scanner by stating it 'does not scan the site' and from change-tracking by pointing to wp_now for 'what changed since a version'.

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?

It gives explicit triggers: 'Use when the user asks if a site is safe or up to date, or before advising on updates or hosting.' It also names the alternative for a related need ('for what changed since a version, use wp_now with since'), leaving little ambiguity about when to call this tool.

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?