Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

WordPress: Wp blocks remove at

wordpress_specialist_wp_blocks_remove_at
Destructive

Removes the WordPress block at a specified index and returns it, enabling callers to roll back by reinserting the removed block.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] Remove the block at the given index. The response includes the removed block so the caller can rollback by feeding it back to wp_blocks_insert_at. Requires Airano MCP Bridge v2.13.0+.

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": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "post_id": "<post_id>",
      "index": "<index>"
    },
    "name": "wordpress_specialist_wp_blocks_remove_at"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
indexYes
post_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the response contains the removed block, which makes the operation reversible, plus a minimum bridge version (v2.13.0+). It stops short of noting what happens to subsequent block indices or out-of-range errors.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and with zero wasted clauses. The surviving sentences each carry content (action, rollback path, version requirement), though the "[UNIFIED]" prefix is noise.

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?

For a destructive, non-idempotent mutation with no output schema and zero parameter documentation, the description covers the important parts an agent cannot infer: reversibility and version compatibility. It still leaves parameter meaning and failure modes unaddressed, which is a meaningful gap for a write operation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across three required parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails. Only `index` gets any treatment, and only implicitly as "the given index"; `site` and `post_id` are never mentioned, leaving the agent to infer whether post_id is global or per-site.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Remove the block at the given index." That clearly separates it from sibling get/replace operations and it names wp_blocks_insert_at as the inverse, so an agent can place it in the block-editing family without opening the schema. The bracketed "[UNIFIED]" tag is meaningless to a caller but doesn't obscure the purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description supplies a rollback recipe (feed the returned block back to wp_blocks_insert_at), which is real operational guidance. It does not say when to choose removal over wp_blocks_replace, nor any precondition such as needing a valid index within the current block count. Usage is therefore implied rather than stated.

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