Frontman for WordPress

wp_elementor_remove_element

Destructive

Removes a whole Elementor element and all of its children after saving the previous element as a private rollback snapshot. Only use when the user explicitly requested removing the whole Elementor widget/container. Ask the user for confirmation first and only call with confirm=true after approval.

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": {
      "site_id": "<site_id>",
      "post_id": "<post_id>",
      "element_id": "<element_id>",
      "scope": "<scope>",
      "confirm": "<confirm>"
    },
    "name": "wp_elementor_remove_element"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scope`	Yes	Must be whole_element to confirm the intent is deleting the complete Elementor element, not nested rendered DOM.
`confirm`	Yes
`post_id`	Yes
`site_id`	Yes	The connected site's id returned by list_sites. Call list_sites first; do not use a URL or WordPress post ID.
`element_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: a private rollback snapshot is saved before deletion, and deletion requires a two-step user-approval flow with confirm=true. That is the exact recovery and authorization context an agent needs for a destructive operation.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the restriction, then the confirmation requirement. No filler or repetition of annotation data.

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 destructive five-parameter tool with no output schema, this covers preconditions, the safety gate, and the undo path. The only gap is what the call returns (e.g., a rollback identifier the agent could later pass to wp_elementor_restore_rollback).

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 only 40%, so the description has to compensate. It does add real meaning for 'confirm' (only true after explicit user approval) and implicitly for 'scope' (whole element, not nested rendered DOM), but it says nothing about element_id or post_id and never explains how to obtain an element_id.

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 ('Removes a whole Elementor element and all of its children') plus the resulting side effect (rollback snapshot). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like wp_elementor_update_element, wp_elementor_duplicate_element, or wp_elementor_move_element.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives an explicit gating condition ('Only use when the user explicitly requested removing the whole Elementor widget/container') and a mandatory confirmation workflow. It does not name a sibling alternative for nearby intents (e.g., editing rather than removing), but the negative framing is strong enough to route the agent correctly.

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

All Frontman for WordPress tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.