Swebsy

Wrap section

swebsy_wrap_section

Wrap a run of sibling components in one new element, optionally with a semantic tag — e.g. put everything between the navbar and footer in <main>, or a footer symbol in <footer>. The wrapped components keep their ids, id-styles and symbol links. ALWAYS use this to add a wrapper; re-sending the components through edit_section/replace_page_content loses their styles. Paths shift — call read_page before the next path-based edit.

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": {
      "targetPath": "<targetPath>"
    },
    "name": "swebsy_wrap_section"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`endPath`	No	Path of the last component to wrap, a later sibling of targetPath. Everything between them is wrapped too. Omit to wrap only targetPath.
`tagName`	No	Wrapper tag. Default div. One `main` per page, never inside header/footer/nav/aside/article.
`customName`	No	Layers-panel label, e.g. "Main content".
`targetPath`	Yes	Path (from the most recent `read_page`) of the first component to wrap.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false). The description goes well beyond that, disclosing state-preservation semantics ('components keep their ids, id-styles and symbol links') and the side effect that invalidates cached state ('Paths shift'). That is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before chaining edits.

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?

Three dense sentences, zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded before the examples, the preservation guarantee, and the path-shift warning. Each sentence carries a distinct, actionable fact.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, preservation, the required re-read follow-up, and the correct alternative tool. It does not say what the call returns (e.g. new paths for the wrapped block) or how to undo, which would fully close the loop for an agent planning a sequence of edits.

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 all four parameters (including the endPath range semantics and the tagName enum constraints) are already documented in structured form. The description's example of wrapping 'everything between the navbar and footer' illustrates endPath but adds no syntax or format detail the schema lacks. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Wrap a run of sibling components in one new element') and immediately grounds it with two concrete examples (navbar/footer into `<main>`, a footer symbol into `<footer>`). It also names the siblings it is not — `edit_section` and `replace_page_content` — so an agent can separate it from the other structural tools without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit directive ('ALWAYS use this to add a wrapper') plus the consequence of the alternative ('re-sending the components through edit_section/replace_page_content loses their styles'). It also states the prerequisite for the next call: 'call `read_page` before the next path-based edit.' When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and sequencing are all covered.

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

All Swebsy tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?