WordPress MCP Server

Alte Revisionen aufräumen

revision_cleanup

Remove old WordPress post revisions and retain only a configurable number of recent versions. Keep the database lean by cleaning up unused revision history.

Instructions

Löscht alte Revisionen und behält nur die letzten N Versionen

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": {
      "postId": "<postId>"
    },
    "name": "revision_cleanup"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`postId`	Yes	Post/Page ID
`postType`	No	Post-Typ	post
`keepCount`	No	Anzahl der zu behaltenden Revisionen

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions deleting old revisions, implying a destructive action, but does not state whether the operation is permanent, reversible, or requires specific permissions. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 in German, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no unnecessary wording and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool is simple with three parameters and no output schema, so the description is relatively minimal. However, as a destructive operation, it lacks details on return values, side effects, or idempotency. It partially meets the need but leaves gaps for an agent to invoke it without full confidence.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage for all three parameters, including descriptions and defaults. The description adds only indirect reference to keepCount (as 'N') and does not enrich or clarify the parameters beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: deleting old revisions while retaining the last N versions. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like revision_delete (which deletes individual revisions) and revision_restore.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as revision_delete or revision_restore. It implies use for bulk cleanup but does not provide exclusions or comparative context.

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

Deploy Server