Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
local-wp-mcp

local-wp-mcp

by teamchrisfromthelc
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get Active Plugins (DB)

wp_active_plugins
Read-only

Query the WordPress database directly to get the active plugins list for a site. Helps manage and troubleshoot plugin activation.

Instructions

Query the database directly to get the list of active WordPress plugins.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wp_active_plugins"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoSite name, ID, or domain. Uses env var if not specified.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the context that the tool queries the database 'directly', implying a direct DB access rather than a WP-CLI call. However, it does not disclose return format, performance implications, or any other behavioral details.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and object. Every word adds value and there is no redundancy or embellishment.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, clear intent) and good annotations, the description is nearly complete. The absence of an output schema means the description could specify the return format, but the purpose is transparent enough that this is not a critical 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for its single parameter 'site', with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Query the database directly to get the list of active WordPress plugins.' The verb 'get' and resource 'active WordPress plugins' are specific, and the addition of 'directly to database' distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_cli_run.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mysql_query or wp_cli_run. The description gives no context for choosing this tool, no exclusions, and no mention of alternative approaches.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools