Frontman for WordPress

wp_elementor_wrap_element

Destructive

Wraps a modern widget or container at its exact position in a new row, optionally adding element_after. Supports root or container parents only, not legacy layouts. Preserves the original subtree IDs; saves one rollback and one final page tree. settings override row defaults. Check rendered desktop/mobile layout after wrapping.

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>"
    },
    "name": "wp_elementor_wrap_element"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`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.
`settings`	No
`element_id`	Yes
`element_after`	No	Elementor subtree: elType is required, and widgets require widgetType. IDs can be omitted at every depth and are generated automatically.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds substantive behavior: original subtree IDs are preserved, exactly one rollback and one final page tree are saved, settings override row defaults, and the agent should verify rendered desktop/mobile layout afterward. These are non-obvious transactional and verification details not available from structured fields; only error/failure handling is absent.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then constraints, then behavior, then a verification tip. No filler; even the terse 'settings override row defaults' fragment carries information. Every sentence earns its place.

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, nested-object mutation with no output schema, the description covers parent restrictions, ID preservation, rollback/save side effects, settings precedence, and post-call verification. It stops short of describing the response payload or failure modes, but an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 40%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies settings semantics ('override row defaults') and the optional element_after subtree, but leaves post_id, element_id, and the relationship to site_id/rendered output unexplained beyond the schema's own site_id note. This is partial, adequate compensation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and effect ('wraps a modern widget or container at its exact position in a new row') and scopes it with 'supports root or container parents only, not legacy layouts.' This is clearly distinct from siblings like move_element, add_element, or duplicate_element, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 real when/when-not guidance: only root or container parents, never legacy layouts, and an optional element_after insertion. It does not route the agent to an alternative tool when the constraint fails (e.g. what to do for legacy layouts), which keeps it from a 5.

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.