wp_plugins_listList installed WordPress plugins with their activation status and available updates, so agents can audit site dependencies before making changes.
List installed plugins with status and available updates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish the safe-read profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the description's remaining burden is low. It adds genuine value by disclosing what the payload contains — plugin status and available updates — which matters since no output schema exists. It does not mention permissions or pagination, so not a 5.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, tightly scoped sentence with the resource front-loaded and the returned fields listed after. No filler, no redundancy with the title or annotations.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list operation whose safety profile is covered by annotations, the description supplies purpose and a summary of returned fields. Without an output schema it would be marginally better to name the exact fields (e.g. version, active/inactive), but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4. Schema coverage is 100% and the empty schema is consistent with the description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ('List installed plugins') plus the scope of data returned ('status and available updates'). This is clearly distinguishable from the mutating sibling wp_plugin_action and from wp_themes_list, though it never names an alternative explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to siblings like wp_plugin_action for changing plugin state. For a zero-parameter read-only listing tool the usage is self-evident from the purpose, so implied usage is adequate but not helpful.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.