Skip to main content
Glama
wppoland

woocommerce-mcp

by wppoland
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools serve entirely different purposes: one provides WooCommerce sales reports, the other searches WordPress blog posts. There is zero overlap in functionality, making it impossible to confuse them.

    Naming Consistency2/5

    Tool names use different patterns: 'sales_report' is a noun phrase, while 'search_posts' follows a verb_noun pattern. This inconsistency makes the set feel ad hoc rather than systematically named.

    Tool Count2/5

    With only 2 tools for a 'woocommerce-mcp' server, the count is far too low. While a minimal server could be justified, the expected scope for WooCommerce typically includes many more operations (e.g., products, orders, customers).

    Completeness1/5

    The tool surface is severely incomplete for WooCommerce. Key operations like managing products, orders, or customers are entirely missing, and the inclusion of a general WordPress search tool unrelated to e-commerce does not address the core domain.

  • Average 3.9/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 8 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the API is public and that no WooCommerce keys are needed, which is useful. However, it does not mention other behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens if no results are found. The transparency is adequate but minimal.

    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 sentence of 13 words, extremely concise. It front-loads the key information: what the tool does and a critical constraint (no WooCommerce keys). No unnecessary words are present, making it highly efficient.

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

    Completeness3/5

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

    Given the low complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no enums, no nested objects), the description is minimal but partially complete. It covers the core functionality and a key context point (public API, no keys). However, it does not describe the return format or any output behavior, which would be helpful given the lack of output schema. For a simple tool, it is adequate but could be more complete.

    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 already has 100% coverage, describing the 'search' and 'per_page' parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning to these parameters beyond what is in the schema. Therefore, the description adds no extra value to parameter understanding, resulting in a baseline score of 3.

    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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'published WordPress blog posts'. It also specifies that this is a public REST API with no WooCommerce keys required, which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'sales_report' that may require such keys. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

    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 provides some context about when to use this tool (public search without WooCommerce keys) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. It implies that if WooCommerce keys are needed, another tool like 'sales_report' should be used, but this is not directly stated. Usage guidance is present but incomplete.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return metrics (gross sales, orders, items) and period options. However, it does not mention read-only status, response format, or potential errors, though the simple nature reduces need.

    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?

    Extremely concise: one sentence front-loaded with key details (platform, purpose, periods, metrics). No unnecessary words.

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

    Completeness5/5

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

    For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential: what it does, what periods are available, and what data is returned. No gaps.

    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 coverage is 100% with period parameter fully described. The description restates the enum values but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description does not improve understanding.

    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 it returns WooCommerce sales totals for a period, listing specific metrics (gross sales, orders, items) and periods. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_product and list_orders, which focus on individual items or order lists.

    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 use when sales aggregations are needed but does not specify when to avoid it or contrast with alternatives (e.g., list_orders for detailed view). No explicit guidance on context or prerequisites.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

woocommerce-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

woocommerce-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/wppoland/woocommerce-mcp'

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