Skip to main content
Glama
alokemajumder

wpxmcp

by alokemajumder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Install a theme

install_theme

Install a WordPress theme from the WordPress.org repository by slug, without activating it. Activate separately when ready.

Instructions

Install a theme from the WordPress.org repository by slug. Does not activate it — use activate_theme, or the draft workflow, afterwards.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugYesWordPress.org theme slug, e.g. "twentytwentyfive".
site_idNoWhich configured WordPress site to act on. Optional — with a single site configured it is used automatically; with several, the default site is used unless you name one. Run list_sites for valid ids.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so mutation is known. The description adds the non-activation behavior and the source (WordPress.org repository), which are not in annotations. It does not elaborate on failure modes or idempotency, but annotation covers idempotentHint=false.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then deliberately narrows scope with the non-activation caveat. Every clause earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple two-param mutation, the description covers the source, the non-activation behavior, and points to alternatives. With annotations providing safety cues and schema covering params, it is sufficiently complete; missing output/error details are minor for this tool.

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 100%, so slug and site_id are fully described. The description only reiterates the slug param ('by slug') without adding new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States the specific action 'Install a theme from the WordPress.org repository by slug', names the resource, and explicitly separates itself from activate_theme with 'Does not activate it'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-not and alternatives: 'Does not activate it — use activate_theme, or the draft workflow, afterwards.' This tells the agent what to do after installing and which alternative tools handle activation.

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