Skip to main content
Glama
alokemajumder

wpxmcp

by alokemajumder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Get site intelligence

site_info
Read-only

Get a full WordPress site diagnostic: versions, active theme and plugins, database size, health checks, updates, and server config. Start here when auditing or troubleshooting a site.

Instructions

A full diagnostic picture of the site in one call: WordPress and PHP versions, active theme, active plugins, database size, health checks, available updates, and server configuration. Start here when auditing a site or diagnosing a problem. Falls back to core REST data when the companion plugin is absent, and says which parts it could not see.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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.
include_healthNoInclude Site Health checks: core's REST-exposed tests (loopback, HTTPS, updates, page cache, Authorization header) always, plus the direct tests when the companion plugin is active. Adds a few seconds.
include_pluginsNoInclude the plugin inventory.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 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
    • changedInput schema / properties / include_health / description
      Previous value: -"Include Site Health checks. Needs the companion plugin."New value: +"Include Site Health checks: core's REST-exposed tests (loopback, HTTPS, updates, page cache, Authorization header) always, plus the direct tests when the companion plugin is active. Adds a few seconds."
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it falls back to core REST data when the companion plugin is absent and explicitly reports which parts it could not see. This honest disclosure of partial visibility goes beyond the structured annotations and helps an agent interpret potentially incomplete results.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words: the first lists the tool's content and scope, the second gives the primary use case, and the third discloses the fallback behavior. The most important context is front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description compensates reasonably by enumerating the diagnostic categories and noting that a visibility report is part of the response. It could go further by describing the response structure or size, but an agent can call this confidently without that detail.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all three parameters clearly, including defaults and the effect of include_health. The description itself doesn't add much parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline.

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?

The description names a specific verb ('Get') and a concrete resource ('site intelligence') and enumerates the exact diagnostic contents: WordPress/PHP versions, active theme/plugins, database size, health checks, updates, and server config. It also clearly separates itself from narrower sibling tools by framing itself as the 'full diagnostic picture' and the starting point for audits.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explicitly says 'Start here when auditing a site or diagnosing a problem,' giving a clear context for use. It doesn't explicitly name alternative sibling tools (e.g., get_site, test_site) or state when not to use them, but the 'start here' framing plus the comprehensive scope is enough to guide an agent.

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