wordpress-mcp

wp_get_active_theme

Retrieve the currently active WordPress theme for a specified site ID to identify the live theme.

Instructions

Get the currently active theme

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>"
    },
    "name": "wp_get_active_theme"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	Site id (see list_sites)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv3.4.0Oct 1, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
- addedInput schema / properties / site
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Site id (see list_sites)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "site"
+]
```
First observedv2.0.0Jun 21, 2026

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, and it discloses almost nothing: no statement that this is a read-only operation, no indication of what the response contains (theme name, stylesheet, version, parent?), and no failure mode when no theme resolves.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; nothing is padded. It is arguably too terse for the disclosure burden it carries, but on pure conciseness it is efficient.

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 trivial one-parameter getter this is close to adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the definition leaves the agent unsure what is returned and how this differs from wp_get_theme. A clause on the return shape or the sibling distinction would close the gap.

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% — the single 'site' parameter is documented in-schema as 'Site id (see list_sites)'. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the schema does the work and a 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 the currently active theme'), and the adjective 'active' distinguishes it from wp_get_theme in concept. However, it never names wp_get_theme, wp_list_themes, or wp_activate_theme, so the sibling boundary is left to inference.

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 when-to-use guidance at all. With siblings like wp_get_theme (get one theme by handle) and wp_list_themes (enumerate all), the agent gets no rule for choosing this tool versus those; it must guess that 'active' is the discriminator.

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

Deploy Server