mcp-wordpress

wp_blocks_get

Retrieve a single reusable block by its ID, returning the complete Gutenberg block markup. Use this to access block content directly from WordPress.

Instructions

Fetch a single reusable block by id with full content (Gutenberg block markup).

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "wp_blocks_get"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`context`	No		edit

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It adds value by noting that the response includes full Gutenberg block markup, but omits other behavioral traits such as error handling for nonexistent ids, required permissions, or any side effects. It is minimal but adequate for a simple read operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It states the action, target, and a crucial detail about the return value in a compact and readable manner.

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 simple get-by-id tool, the description covers the core purpose and the nature of the returned content. With no output schema, it offers enough orientation for an agent, though it might have added more about the context parameter or error cases. Overall it is reasonably complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description explains 'by id' which clarifies the primary 'id' parameter, but the 'context' parameter (with enum view/edit/embed) is left entirely unmentioned. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description partially compensates but has a clear gap for one of the two parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('single reusable block by id'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like wp_blocks_list, create, update, or delete. It also adds the clarifying detail that it returns full Gutenberg markup, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage (fetch one block by id) but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives. There is no mention of using wp_blocks_list to find ids, nor any exclusions, making it only implicitly useful for tool selection.

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

Deploy Server