Skip to main content
Glama

WP Update Radar

by xyz.utilityhouse.updates
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

wp_update_radar_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reports what wordpress.org's public support forum says about one plugin release, compared with the releases before it, counted the same way on both sides. It does not answer whether an update is safe: nothing here can see your site, your theme, your premium plugins or your PHP version. state is what the evidence supports doing, signal is only what was observed: HOLD elevated public signal for this release WAIT above this plugin's own normal, or the window is still open GUARDED_ROLLOUT no elevated public signal — roll out somewhere low-stakes first NOT_ENOUGH_EVIDENCE too little was attributable to judge; a gap here, NOT a finding about the release, and not a reason to reassure anyone The legacy verdict field keeps its five strings (known-bad / wait / update-now / too-new / insufficient-data) for clients that already read it. Use it before applying a plugin update, or when someone asks whether a specific version broke anything. Not a security advisory and not a CVE lookup: it reports what other site owners are saying, which is a different question from whether a release is vulnerable. wordpress.org plugins only — premium and paid plugins have no public forum to read, and themes are out of scope. Covers the most-installed plugins; one outside that set returns an error rather than a guess.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pluginYeswordpress.org plugin slug, e.g. "woocommerce"
versionYesExact release to check, e.g. "8.5.1"

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYeswhat to do. Separate from `signal`, which is only what was observed.
signalYeswhat the public forum showed. NO_OBSERVATION means nothing was comparable, which is not the same as nothing being wrong.
threadsYes
verdictYes
baselineYesaverage threads per release for this plugin
coverageYeshow much of this plugin's forum could be attributed at all
unknownsYeswhat this answer does not know. Never empty.
freshnessYes
attributionYeshow many threads were tied to this release and to its baseline, by the same function
reasonCodesYesfinite reasons for the state
weakEvidenceYesthreads in this version's window that named no version
lastCheckedAtYesepoch ms this plugin's forum was last swept; 0 means never
strongEvidenceYesthreads naming this exact version
baselineReleasesYeshow many other releases the baseline was drawn from

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / attribution
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "how many threads were tied to this release and to its baseline, by the same function",
+  "properties": {
+    "baseline": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "attributed": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "explicit": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "mean": {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        "releases": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "window": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "releases",
+        "explicit",
+        "window",
+        "attributed",
+        "mean"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "current": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "attributed": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "explicit": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "window": {
+          "type": "integer"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "explicit",
+        "window",
+        "attributed"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "sameFunction": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "current",
+    "baseline",
+    "sameFunction"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / coverage
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "how much of this plugin's forum could be attributed at all",
+  "properties": {
+    "ambiguous": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "attributedRate": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "directMappingRate": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "explicit": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "postTimeUnknown": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "threadsTotal": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "unattributed": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "window": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "threadsTotal",
+    "explicit",
+    "window",
+    "unattributed",
+    "ambiguous",
+    "directMappingRate",
+    "attributedRate",
+    "postTimeUnknown"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / freshness
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "ageHours": {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "lastCheckedAt": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "stale": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "lastCheckedAt",
+    "ageHours",
+    "stale"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / reasonCodes
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "finite reasons for the state",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / signal
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "what the public forum showed. NO_OBSERVATION means nothing was comparable, which is not the same as nothing being wrong.",
+  "enum": [
+    "ELEVATED_PUBLIC_SIGNAL",
+    "NO_ELEVATED_PUBLIC_SIGNAL",
+    "NO_OBSERVATION"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / state
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "what to do. Separate from `signal`, which is only what was observed.",
+  "enum": [
+    "GUARDED_ROLLOUT",
+    "WAIT",
+    "HOLD",
+    "NOT_ENOUGH_EVIDENCE"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / threads / items / properties / thread_time / description
      Previous value: -"epoch ms the thread was posted"New value: +"epoch ms of the timestamp identified by timeBasis"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / threads / items / properties / timeBasis
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "whether thread_time is the topic creation time or only its last activity time",
+  "enum": [
+    "TOPIC_CREATED",
+    "LAST_ACTIVITY"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / threads / items / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "title",
-  "url",
-  "thread_time",
-  "version"
-]New value: +[
+  "title",
+  "url",
+  "thread_time",
+  "version",
+  "timeBasis"
+]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / unknowns
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "what this answer does not know. Never empty.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "verdict",
-  "lastCheckedAt",
-  "baselineReleases",
-  "strongEvidence",
-  "weakEvidence",
-  "baseline",
-  "threads"
-]New value: +[
+  "verdict",
+  "lastCheckedAt",
+  "baselineReleases",
+  "strongEvidence",
+  "weakEvidence",
+  "baseline",
+  "threads",
+  "state",
+  "signal",
+  "reasonCodes",
+  "attribution",
+  "coverage",
+  "freshness",
+  "unknowns"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and idempotency, and the description goes well beyond them: it details what the tool cannot see (site, theme, premium plugins, PHP version), explains the meaning of 'state' and 'signal', describes error behavior for out-of-scope plugins, and notes the legacy 'verdict' field. This is substantial behavioral disclosure that helps an agent set expectations correctly. No contradiction with annotations.

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 longer than typical but well structured: it front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence, then covers limitations, state/signal semantics, legacy fields, usage, and scope in a logical order. Every sentence adds contextual value, though it could be tightened without losing information. It is not verbose for the sake of verbosity, so it earns a 4.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value explanation is not needed, and the description covers all other necessary context: what the tool does, what it doesn't do, how to interpret results (state/signal), the legacy field, error scenarios, scope restrictions, and usage guidance. No critical information is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 tool's parameters are already fully documented in the schema ('wordpress.org plugin slug' and 'Exact release to check'). The description doesn't add further semantic value about the parameters beyond what the schema provides; it simply uses them in context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Reports') and resource ('what wordpress.org's public support forum says about one plugin release'), and clarifies it compares against prior releases. It also distinguishes itself from security advisories and CVE lookups, so the core purpose is unambiguous. The mention of 'one plugin release' hints at differentiation from the sibling but doesn't name it, yet the purpose is still clear.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives explicit when-to-use context ('before applying a plugin update, or when someone asks whether a specific version broke anything') and when-not-to-use (not for security advisories, not for premium plugins/themes). However, it never mentions the sibling wp_update_radar_check_many or says when to use that instead, so the alternatives dimension is incomplete. This is a clear context but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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

All WP Update Radar toolsInspect
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