Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wordpress-mcp

wordpress-mcp

by cvrt-jh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

seo_get_redirect

Retrieve a specific redirect by its ID for a given WordPress site to inspect or manage redirect rules.

Instructions

Get a redirect by id.

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>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "seo_get_redirect"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRedirect ID
siteYesSite id (see list_sites)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.4.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Get' implies a read with no side effects, but nothing states the return shape, what happens when the id does not exist, or whether the site must be accessible. For a no-annotation tool this is thin.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero waste. It is efficiently sized, though efficiency here partly reflects under-specification rather than editorial tightness.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the minimum is arguably met. Still missing is any note on not-found behavior or that it is a read-only sibling to create/update/delete redirect tools.

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% and both parameters are documented there, including the pointer to list_sites for the site id. The description adds no meaning beyond 'by id', so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Get a redirect by id'), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like seo_list_redirects or seo_get_post_seo, and 'redirect by id' is the only scoping detail given.

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 on when to use this versus seo_list_redirects (list all) or seo_update_redirect/seo_delete_redirect. The agent must infer that this is the single-item read path from the name alone.

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