Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wp-ssh-mcp

wp-ssh-mcp

by MSSOFTPC
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

diagnostics

diagnostics
Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect PHP memory and config, autoload options size, database size and largest tables, transients, revisions, and active caching plugins to diagnose WordPress performance issues.

Instructions

PHP/memory config, autoload options size, DB size and largest tables, transients/revisions counts, active caching plugins.

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": "diagnostics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the specific inventory gathered, but says nothing about cost (DB size / largest-table scans can be expensive), return shape, or whether results are cached.

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?

A single compact fragment with zero filler, front-loading the most important categories. It would be stronger with a lead verb (e.g. 'Returns ...'), but nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema, the description must convey what comes back, and the category list does that at a high level. It stops short of describing result structure, per-section depth, or overlap with site_info/plugin_list, which leaves real ambiguity for a zero-param aggregate tool.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. Schema coverage is reported at 100% for an empty property set.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description enumerates the data categories returned (PHP/memory config, autoload size, DB size, transient/revision counts, caching plugins), which gives a reasonable sense of the resource. But it is a bare noun phrase with no verb and no differentiation from close siblings like site_info, health_check_status, or plugin_list.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no condition selecting this over site_info or health_check_run, and no prerequisites mentioned. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the general-purpose environment snapshot tool.

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