Sitecore Community MCP

run-powershell-script

Destructive

Execute PowerShell code against Sitecore XM, XP, or SitecoreAI and return the output for item, media, security, publishing, and logging tasks.

Instructions

Runs a PowerShell script and returns the output. Before writing a script that changes many items, read the guide://bulk-update resource: it carries the pattern a mass write needs (every ID resolved from the instance, a named subtree as the root, a dry run the user approves, BeginEdit/EndEdit with a per-item try/catch).

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": {
      "script": "<script>"
    },
    "name": "run-powershell-script"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`script`	Yes	The Powershell script to run.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.3Oct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the mass-write pattern (dry run the user approves, BeginEdit/EndEdit with per-item try/catch, IDs resolved from the instance). It omits execution environment, permission requirements, and timeout/output-size limits, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Two sentences, purpose front-loaded, zero filler. The second sentence is long but every clause is actionable (the resource to read and the specific pattern it carries).

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a single-parameter, no-output-schema tool whose destructive/open-world nature is declared via annotations, the description covers purpose, return behavior, and a safe-workflow pointer. It stops short of stating execution prerequisites (auth/permissions, host context) that would matter for an arbitrary code-execution tool.

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?

Only one parameter exists and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents 'script'. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail about the script argument itself; baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Runs a PowerShell script') plus the return behavior ('returns the output'). No sibling tool competes for arbitrary script execution — get-powershell-documentation only retrieves documentation — so the agent can route unambiguously.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit conditional: before writing a script that changes many items, read guide://bulk-update. That is clear, actionable context. However, it never says when NOT to reach for this tool (e.g. single-item edits better served by item-service-edit-item or authoring-update-item), so the alternative-routing half is missing.

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

Deploy Server