wp-cli-mcp

wp_scaffold_theme

Generate a child theme skeleton for WordPress development. Use this tool to create theme files with proper structure and naming conventions.

Instructions

Generate a child theme skeleton

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "wp_scaffold_theme"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	Theme slug
`theme_name`	No	Theme display name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Apr 14, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

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. 'Generate' implies a write operation, but the description doesn't specify what gets created (files, directories), whether it overwrites existing files, what permissions are needed, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that modifies the filesystem.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and appropriately sized for a straightforward tool.

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 tool that generates files (implied by 'scaffold'), the description is incomplete. With no annotations and no output schema, it doesn't explain what gets created, where files are placed, or what the tool returns. This is inadequate for understanding the tool's full behavior and output.

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 the schema fully documents both parameters ('slug' and 'theme_name'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, maintaining the baseline score of 3 for 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 ('Generate') and the resource ('child theme skeleton'), providing specific functionality. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'wp_scaffold_block' or 'wp_scaffold_plugin', which also generate code skeletons but for different WordPress components.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over other theme-related tools like 'wp_theme_install' or 'wp_theme_create', nor does it specify prerequisites or typical use cases for child theme scaffolding.

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