AutoWP MCP Server

delete-post

Permanently delete a WordPress post by ID, with an option to force deletion and bypass the trash.

Instructions

Permanently delete a WordPress post

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": {
      "postId": "<postId>"
    },
    "name": "delete-post"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`force`	No	Force delete (bypass trash)
`postId`	Yes	ID of the post to delete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for revealing behavioral traits. It claims 'permanently delete,' but the input schema shows that force defaults to false, meaning the default behavior is actually moving the post to trash, not permanent deletion. This directly misrepresents the tool's behavior and contradicts the parameter semantics, failing to disclose the critical distinction between trash and bypass-trash.

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 only six words and front-loads the core action. It is concise, but the brevity sacrifices necessary nuance about the trash/permanent distinction. The single sentence is not overly verbose, but it omits critical qualifiers, so it is not perfectly effective.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a destructive tool with a force parameter and no output schema, this description is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the role of force in determining whether the action is permanent or reversible, does not describe return values, and does not mention related behavior like whether related content is affected. Given the complexity of the tool, this is insufficient.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Although the schema has 100% description coverage, the description adds no meaningful parameter semantics and misleads about the force parameter. The phrase 'permanently delete' implies force is always true, contradicting the schema's default of false. It also provides no extra context for postId beyond what the schema already states.

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 verb 'delete' and resource 'WordPress post' are specific, and the qualifier 'permanently' attempts to distinguish from trash-post. However, this qualifier is misleading because the force parameter defaults to false, meaning the post is moved to trash rather than permanently deleted unless force is true. This inaccuracy undermines clear tool selection.

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?

The description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The word 'permanently' implies usage for permanent deletion, but it falsely suggests the tool always performs permanent deletion, ignoring the trash behavior controlled by the force parameter. No alternatives are mentioned.

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