wp_criu

plugin_action

Activate, deactivate, or delete a plugin on a WordPress site by specifying the plugin file and site details.

Instructions

Activa, desactiva o elimina un plugin por plugin_file.

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>",
      "plugin_file": "<plugin_file>",
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "plugin_action"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`site`	Yes	site_id, site_label o base_url del sitio.
`plugin_file`	Yes
`action`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jun 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description only lists actions without disclosing side effects (e.g., irreversible delete, activation impact on site). No mention of permissions, errors, or state changes. The agent cannot infer behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, clear sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the core function. However, it could include more structure (e.g., bullet points for actions) without losing conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 3 required params and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, error behavior, or usage context (e.g., plugin must exist). The description is insufficient for reliable use without external documentation.

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 33% (only 'site' has description). The description adds 'por plugin_file' but does not clarify what a plugin_file is (filename, slug, path). The 'action' enum values are not explained. The description adds minimal value 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?

The description clearly states the tool activates, deactivates, or deletes a plugin by plugin_file. The verb 'activa/desactiva/elimina' combined with 'plugin' makes the purpose explicit. It distinguishes from siblings like list_plugins (read-only) and install_plugin_zip (installation).

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not specify prerequisites (e.g., plugin must be installed) or context for each action (e.g., deactivate before delete). Sibling tools exist but no comparisons are given.

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

Deploy Server