Pressable MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pressable_get_mu_plugin

Retrieve details for a specific must-use WordPress plugin by providing its ID, enabling management of site functionality through the Pressable API.

Instructions

Get details for a specific MU plugin.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Implementation Reference

tools/mu_plugins.js:26-28 (handler)
The handler function for 'pressable_get_mu_plugin' that fetches plugin details from the API.
```
handler: async (args) => {
    return await api.get(`/mu-plugins/${args.id}`);
}
```
tools/mu_plugins.js:21-25 (schema)
Input schema for 'pressable_get_mu_plugin' defining the required 'id' parameter.
```
inputSchema: {
    type: 'object',
    properties: { id: { type: 'integer' } },
    required: ['id']
},
```

tools/mu_plugins.js:18-30 (registration)

Registration block for the 'pressable_get_mu_plugin' tool.

    {
        name: 'pressable_get_mu_plugin',
        description: 'Get details for a specific MU plugin.',
        inputSchema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: { id: { type: 'integer' } },
            required: ['id']
        },
        handler: async (args) => {
            return await api.get(`/mu-plugins/${args.id}`);
        }
    }
];

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Mar 24, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Get details' without disclosing read-only nature, error handling, or response format. The behavior is safe but unstated.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded, with no unnecessary words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool is simple, but with no output schema or annotations, the description is too sparse. It doesn't mention return details, error cases, or why to use this instead of pressable_list_mu_plugins.

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 0% for the 'id' parameter. The description adds some context by implying the id identifies the MU plugin, but it doesn't explicitly describe the parameter or its expected format.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action (get) and resource (details for a specific MU plugin). It implies single-item retrieval, distinguishing it from list_mu_plugins, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it should be used when a specific MU plugin ID is available, nor does it reference list_mu_plugins or other getter tools.

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

Deploy Server