WordPress

# Fix list: WordPress

From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/wordpress, the October 2026 research run, assessed 8 October 2026. Grade B, 64.8 out of 100.

This is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public.

For a coding agent working on WordPress: work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published.

## 1. Security & auth, 62 out of 100, up to 6.7 more on the total

Why it scored 62: Application Passwords are per application, revocable one at a time, sent only in the Authorization header and refused on plain HTTP outside a local environment. They have no scopes or expiry and carry every capability of their user, so we scored plain revocable keys plus 2 for role-based limits (22 of 30). A Contributor account can draft but not publish, deletes go to the Trash by default, and MCP abilities are private unless marked public. Nothing asks a person to approve a publish by a user who holds that capability (14 of 20). Posts and comments hold text written by other people, and no prompt-injection guidance was found in the REST handbook or the MCP Adapter docs (3 of 15). Revisions record author and date, and each password records its last use and IP. Core has no log of API calls (6 of 15). security.txt is valid until 30 June 2027, reports go through HackerOne, and fixes are published with CVE and GHSA identifiers and backported to 4.7. Certifications don't apply to self-hosted software (17 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security):

- 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option.
- 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions.
- 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10.
- 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator.
- 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public.

Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing.

## 2. Schema & documentation, 65 out of 100, up to 5.7 more on the total

Why it scored 65: No published OpenAPI file. Each site describes its routes and their JSON Schema arguments at /wp-json and on OPTIONS requests, which needs a live site, and abilities carry input and output schemas (15 of 25). wordpress.org/llms.txt is a 5.7 KB index of links. developer.wordpress.org/llms.txt returned 404 and no Markdown copies of the handbook were found (5 of 10). The reference describes each endpoint and argument, with little on when not to use one (12 of 20). Arguments are typed with enums for `status` and `context` and limits on `per_page`, while `content` is one HTML or block markup string and `meta` is open (11 of 15). Each reference page carries example requests. Errors return `code`, `message` and `data.status`, with no list of codes per endpoint (9 of 15). The wp/v2 namespace is versioned and every release has a dated post (13 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema):

APIs and MCP servers.

- 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool).
- 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents.
- 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference.
- 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs.
- 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses.
- 15, versioning and a public changelog.

Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference.

## 3. Payments & pricing, 60 out of 100, up to 5 more on the total

Why it scored 60: Scored with the self-hosted rule. No x402, MPP or L402 (0). The software is free under the GPL with nothing to buy from WordPress.org (20). No card or account is needed (20). `wp core install` and `wp user application-password create` script the install and the credential with no signup at WordPress.org (20). Hosting is a cost the owner chooses.

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments):

The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/).

- 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which.
- 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for "contact sales" or prices behind a login.
- 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card.
- 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API).

Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied.

Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol.

## 4. Reliability, 78 out of 100, up to 4.4 more on the total

Why it scored 78: Read with the local-software lines, since each site runs on its owner's host and WordPress.org runs no hosted API. Official download from wordpress.org with PHP 7.4 and MySQL 5.5.5 stated as the minimum (20). PHPUnit, end-to-end and coding standards workflows on wordpress-develop all showed passing on trunk on 8 October 2026 (25). core.trac.wordpress.org refused our request with a 403, so open ticket counts are unread. From the release posts, 7.1.1 fixed 36 bugs four weeks after 7.1 and 7.1.3 fixed 4 more (10 of 25). Version numbers aren't semver. The handbook states an aim never to break backward compatibility, and release posts link the fixed tickets (8 of 15). 7.1.3 is a stable release and the REST API has been in core since 4.7 (15). No rate limits or 429 handling in core, which these lines don't score.

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability):

Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms.

- 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own).
- 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so.
- 15, rate limits documented with numbers.
- 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved.
- 10, an SLA published for any paid tier.
- 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview.

Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers.

- 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated.
- 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch.
- 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered).
- 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog.
- 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable.

Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors.

## 5. Agent ergonomics, 74 out of 100, up to 4.2 more on the total

Why it scored 74: `_fields` trims a response down to nested properties, `context` picks view, embed or edit, and the MCP Adapter's default server lists three meta-tools however many abilities exist (22 of 25). `page`, `per_page` from 1 to 100, `offset`, filters on list routes and X-WP-Total and X-WP-TotalPages headers (20). Errors carry `code`, `message` and `data.status`, without a published list of codes (14 of 20). No idempotency keys. Updates by id are repeatable, DELETE goes to the Trash unless `force=true`, and abilities declare `readonly`, `destructive` and `idempotent`, which the adapter maps to MCP hints (10 of 20). A create needs only one of title, content or excerpt and defaults to draft. Official clients are JavaScript only, plus WP-CLI (8 of 15).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics):

- 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries).
- 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls.
- 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from.
- 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations.
- 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages.

Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs.

## 6. Transparency & trust, 68 out of 100, up to 2.8 more on the total

Made of editorial 72, provenance 63.

Why it scored 68: GPL version 2 or later, with the source public (30). Content stays on the owner's server. The privacy policy covers the WordPress.org sites, names api.wordpress.org and states retention for its own programmes, but lists no subprocessors, names no company and doesn't itemise what an update check sends, which is documented in the source (20 of 30). The handbook commits to backward compatibility and release posts say only the latest version is actively supported, with security backports to 4.7 as a courtesy. No notice period with dates was found (12 of 20). Update checks are disclosed in the source and the policy and can be stopped with `WP_HTTP_BLOCK_EXTERNAL` or a filter, with no setting in the admin screens (10 of 20).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency):

- 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms.
- 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors).
- 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates.
- 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted).

The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two.

Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts):

- Endpoint on the vendor's domain:  is not on wordpress.org (0 of 15)
- Terms of service: not found (0 of 10)
- Privacy policy: read, states 5 of the 8 things a reader expects (7.8 of 10)
- Status page: not found (0 of 10)

## 7. Maintenance & community, 83 out of 100, up to 1.5 more on the total

Why it scored 83: 7.1.3 was released on 6 October 2026, two days before this check (30). Six stable releases since 6 August 2026 (7.0.3, 7.0.4, 7.1, 7.1.1, 7.1.2 and 7.1.3) (20). Trac refused our request, so ticket handling is unread. Trunk had commits on 8 October, the critical fix of 22 September shipped with backports, and security reports are credited by name in each release post (15 of 25). The MCP Adapter reached v0.7.0 on 2 October 2026. WP-CLI's newest tag is v2.12.0 of 7 May 2025, and the official MCP registry timed out twice, so its listing is unread (8 of 15). CI, PHPStan and PHP compatibility workflows run on trunk (10).

The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance):

- 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older.
- 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days.
- 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15.
- 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models).
- 10, package health, current dependencies and CI.

Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts.

## Deductions

Each comes off the total. A fixed and documented problem counts for less at the next check.

- 22 September 2026. WordPress 7.1.2 fixed a critical flaw, CVE-2026-87902 (GHSA-7hp8-65ch-5whp), in which an unauthenticated attacker could, where server and theme conditions were met, make template resolution include a local PHP file and reach remote code execution. 7.1.1 on 17 September and 7.1.3 on 6 October fixed 18 further security issues. All were published by the project with the fix and backported, and we found no report of exploitation in the release posts, so we deduct 5 of a possible 15. https://wordpress.org/news/2026/09/wordpress-7-1-2-release/ ; https://wordpress.org/news/2026/10/wordpress-7-1-3-maintenance-and-security-release/

## What we couldn't check

What we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it.

- unchecked: core.trac.wordpress.org answered 403, so open ticket counts and reply times are unread and the Reliability and Maintenance lines that depend on them are scored from release posts
- unchecked: the official MCP registry timed out twice, so whether the MCP Adapter is listed there is unread
- unchecked: the HackerOne programme page (scope and bounty amounts) and the advisory GHSA-7hp8-65ch-5whp itself. The flaw's description comes from the 7.1.2 release post
- unchecked: api.github.com reached its rate limit, so star counts for the MCP Adapter and WP-CLI are unread. The star count shown is for the WordPress/WordPress mirror (wordpress-develop has 3,478)
- The lead named WordPress Foundation / Automattic as the vendor. The pages we read name only WordPress.org and give the trademark to the WordPress Foundation. Automattic appears only as publisher of the @automattic/mcp-wordpress-remote proxy
- No terms document governs the software, so `provenance.terms` is left out. The privacy policy is WordPress.org's and covers update checks to api.wordpress.org, not content on a self-hosted site
- We didn't run a site, so route behaviour comes from the handbook and the source on trunk at 8 October 2026
- Disclosure. The 7.1.1 and 7.1.3 release posts credit Anthropic for five of the reported vulnerabilities, and these grades are written by an agent on Anthropic's Claude models. The checklist was applied as for any listing
- cms.localisation and cms.schema aren't claimed. Core has no content translation, and post types are registered in PHP, not through the REST API

## Weaknesses

- Application Passwords have no scopes or expiry. Each one carries every capability of its user
- The revisions route supports GET and DELETE only, so a rollback means writing the old content back as a new update
- Core has no rate limit, no idempotency keys and no log of API calls beyond revisions and a password's last use
- A critical flaw (CVE-2026-87902) fixed in 7.1.2 on 22 September 2026 allowed remote code execution under certain server and theme conditions
- No published OpenAPI file. Each site describes its own routes at `/wp-json`, and core has no content localisation

## What costs an agent a turn today

The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need.

- Ask the owner for a dedicated user with the lowest role that fits. A Contributor can draft and edit its own posts but can't publish them
- Send the Application Password as Basic auth over HTTPS only. Core disables Application Passwords on plain HTTP outside a local environment
- Upload a file with POST `/wp-json/wp/v2/media` first, then set `featured_media` or reference the returned URL in the post content
- To roll back, GET `/wp/v2/posts/<id>/revisions/<rev>?context=edit` and POST its title and content to the post. There's no restore route
- Pass `_fields=id,status,link,modified` on lists and read X-WP-TotalPages. `per_page` stops at 100

## When it's done

Send what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `"kind": "dispute"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.