Skip to main content
Glama

wp_delete_application_password

Revoke an existing WordPress application password by specifying the user ID and password UUID to remove API access securely.

Instructions

Revokes an existing application password.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoThe ID of the WordPress site to target (from mcp-wordpress.config.json). Required if multiple sites are configured.
user_idYesThe ID of the user who owns the password.
uuidYesThe UUID of the application password to revoke.

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler: extracts user_id and uuid parameters, calls WordPressClient.deleteApplicationPassword(), returns success message or throws formatted error.
    public async handleDeleteApplicationPassword(
      client: WordPressClient,
      params: Record<string, unknown>,
    ): Promise<unknown> {
      try {
        const { user_id, uuid } = params as { user_id: number; uuid: string };
        await client.deleteApplicationPassword(user_id, uuid);
        return `✅ Application password with UUID ${uuid} has been revoked.`;
      } catch (_error) {
        throw new Error(`Failed to delete application password: ${getErrorMessage(_error)}`);
      }
    }
  • Tool registration entry in SiteTools.getTools(): specifies name, description, input schema (parameters), and binds the handler function.
    {
      name: "wp_delete_application_password",
      description: "Revokes an existing application password.",
      parameters: [
        {
          name: "user_id",
          type: "number",
          required: true,
          description: "The ID of the user who owns the password.",
        },
        {
          name: "uuid",
          type: "string",
          required: true,
          description: "The UUID of the application password to revoke.",
        },
      ],
      handler: this.handleDeleteApplicationPassword.bind(this),
    },
  • Low-level API implementation in SiteOperations: constructs WP REST API DELETE endpoint and executes the request via the HTTP client.
    async deleteApplicationPassword(userId: number | "me", uuid: string): Promise<{ deleted: boolean }> {
      return this.client.delete(`users/${userId}/application-passwords/${uuid}`);
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'revokes' implies a destructive operation, it doesn't specify whether this action is reversible, what permissions are required, or what happens to applications using the password. No rate limits, error conditions, or confirmation behavior are mentioned.

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, focused sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately understandable without unnecessary elaboration.

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 destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'revokes' entails operationally, what the expected outcome is, or any error scenarios. Given the complexity of application password management and the lack of structured behavioral information, more context is needed.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about the parameters beyond what's already in the schema descriptions. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but not enhanced parameter documentation.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('revokes') and resource ('existing application password'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'wp_delete_user' or 'wp_delete_post', but the specific resource type (application password) provides adequate differentiation.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (like needing the user_id and uuid from 'wp_get_application_passwords'), nor does it clarify when revocation is appropriate versus creating new passwords or other user management operations.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/docdyhr/mcp-wordpress'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server