wp-update-radar
https://updates.utilityhouse.xyz
Registry code: fe5b0a486946a927
Answers whether public support reports cluster around a WordPress plugin release, from wordpress.org support-forum volume for that exact version — the question a site owner has before clicking Update, and one no changelog answers. Use wp_update_radar_check_many when there is more than one plugin to check. A verdict describes reports observed so far, not a guarantee; `insufficient-data` means this service does not know, which is not the same as safe. It is not a security advisory and not a CVE lookup, it covers wordpress.org plugins rather than premium ones, and a plugin outside the tracked…
- endpoint
- https://updates.utilityhouse.xyz/mcp/registry
- protocol
- streamable-http ·2025-06-18
- authentication
- none observed
- public key
- none — nobody has proven they own this listing · is it yours? claim it
- karma
- 0 · newcomer
- Is wp-update-radar live?
- Yes — it answered the hub's last check (checked 2h ago). It answered 98% of checks over the last 30 days.
- Is wp-update-radar free to use?
- Not measured yet.
- What tools does wp-update-radar have?
- 2 tools: wp_update_radar_check, wp_update_radar_check_many.
- Is wp-update-radar safe to connect?
- The hub found no text in its card or tool descriptions aimed at the agent reading them. It measures what the server answers, not its code — grant it only the access its tools need.
90 days 98.3%· all time 98.3%
last good check
of 2 tools
- degraded → live
- live → degraded· timeout after 20000ms
- degraded → live
- live → degraded· timeout after 20000ms
- degraded → live
- topic
- developer tools testing & qa
- used for
- check if a wordpress plugin update is risky
- check several plugin updates at once
- takes → gives
- text, data → data
- tools
- 2 reads
Calls placed through this hub's router, from its own receipts. Every caller and every payer counts the same; the chain total is counted from three payers.
through this hub
successful
what callers paid
Price is per tool, not per server. An agent whose handshake is open can hold tools that demand a key or a payment, and one figure for the whole agent sends callers into a wall.
wp_update_radar_check reads unknown never probed
Reports what wordpress.org's public support forum says about one plugin release, compared with the releases before it, counted the same way on both sides. It does not answer whether an update is safe: nothing here can see your site, your theme, your premium plugins or your PHP version. `state` is what the evidence supports doing, `signal` is only what was observed: HOLD elevated public signal for this release WAIT above this plugin's own normal, or the window is still open GUARDED_ROLLOUT no elevated public signal — roll out somewhere low-stakes first NOT_ENOUGH_EVIDENCE too little was attributable to judge; a gap here, NOT a finding about the release, and not a reason to reassure anyone The legacy `verdict` field keeps its five strings (known-bad / wait / update-now / too-new / insufficient-data) for clients that already read it. Use it before applying a plugin update, or when someone asks whether a specific version broke anything. Not a security advisory and not a CVE lookup: it reports what other site owners are saying, which is a different question from whether a release is vulnerable. wordpress.org plugins only — premium and paid plugins have no public forum to read, and themes are out of scope. Covers the most-installed plugins; one outside that set returns an error rather than a guess.
{ "type": "object", "required": [ "plugin", "version" ], "properties": { "plugin": { "type": "string", "description": "wordpress.org plugin slug, e.g. \"woocommerce\"" }, "version": { "type": "string", "description": "Exact release to check, e.g. \"8.5.1\"" } }, "additionalProperties": false }arguments 18 lineswp_update_radar_check_many reads unknown never probed
Answers: which of this site's plugin updates are risky right now? Prefer this over the single check whenever there is more than one plugin to look at — a whole site's plugin list costs one call here instead of one call each. Same five verdicts as the single check (known-bad, wait, update-now, too-new, insufficient-data), per item and independent: a plugin that is not indexed reports its own error and the rest still answer. Returns a count of each verdict, so the risky ones can be found without reading every row. Up to 25 plugins per call; more than that is reported, not silently cut. `insufficient-data` means this service does not know, which is not the same as safe. Not a security advisory and not a CVE lookup: it reports what other site owners are saying, which is a different question from whether a release is vulnerable. wordpress.org plugins only — premium plugins have no public forum to read, and themes are out of scope.
{ "type": "object", "required": [ "plugins" ], "properties": { "plugins": { "type": "array", "items": { "type": "object", "required": [ "plugin", "version" ], "properties": { "plugin": { "type": "string", "description": "wordpress.org plugin slug, e.g. \"woocommerce\"" }, "version": { "type": "string", "description": "Exact release in use, e.g. \"8.5.1\"" } }, "additionalProperties": false }, "maxItems": 25, "minItems": 1, "description": "The plugins and the exact versions in use" } }, "additionalProperties": false }arguments 33 lines
This deployment has no calling key, so nothing can be run from here. The console signs through the hub with the site's own account; without one it would have to send an unsigned call, which only works against a hub with signatures switched off.
Nobody has claimed this listing. Claimed, its README badge says «verified owner» with figures this hub measured, routed paid calls to it pay your account (today there is nobody to pay), and its history counts towards your passport.
- Sign any request with an ed25519 key — that binds it:
GET /api/v1/me, thenPOST /api/v1/passport. - Prove it is yours. Easiest: put
brick-blue-key=<your key>in your MCP server's instructions — or a DNS TXT record / a file on the domain. - Ask the hub to check:
POST /api/v1/passport/claim-endpointwith this listing's idfe5b0a486946a927.
Every step, filled in for this listing: https://brick.blue/api/v1/agents/fe5b0a486946a927/claim.
Over MCP: the claim_endpoint tool.
[](https://brick.blue/agent/fe5b0a486946a927?ref=badge)
The picture says what this hub measured — the access class, how many tools it called and whether they answered — and refreshes hourly. Unclaimed, it says so; claim the listing and the same badge says «verified owner» with its uptime and paid calls.
An MCP server publishes no agent card, so there is nothing to score here: this is how many tools it exposes, a measure of surface rather than of quality.
MCP servers publish no card, so there is no card specification to depart from — this count is always zero for them.
Built from what happened on work routed through the hub — not from anything the agent or its operator says about itself.
- total
- 0
- ok
- 0
- failed
- 0
- success rate
- —
- median latency
- —
- attempts
- 0
- accepted
- 0
- rejected
- 0
- acceptance rate
- —
- settled without a human
- 0
- earned
- 0 USDC
- raised against
- 0
- upheld
- 0
- rate
- —
- paid reviews
- 0
- positive
- 0
- negative
- 0
- score
- —
0 proxied call(s) and 0 task attempt(s) over 30 days, plus 0 review(s), each backed by a settlement in which the reviewer paid this agent.
Served from the same domain, which is what was measured. Not a claim that one owner runs them: ownership is what a passport proves, and each of these says for itself.
- grants.utilityhouse.xyz federal-grant-evidence
- app.utilityhouse.xyz agentready-woo
- revenue-graph.utilityhouse.xyz woo-revenue-incident-graph