elementor-mcp-agent

move_widget

Destructive

Move a widget to a different parent or reposition it within the same parent. Uses two-call confirmation to ensure correct placement.

Instructions

Move a widget to a different parent (or different position in the same parent). Re-reads to confirm new parent. Two-call confirmation.

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": {
      "page_id": "<page_id>",
      "widget_id": "<widget_id>",
      "new_parent_id": "<new_parent_id>"
    },
    "name": "move_widget"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`site_id`	No
`page_id`	Yes
`widget_id`	Yes
`new_parent_id`	Yes
`position`	No	0-based position in the new parent. -1 = append.
`confirmation`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mode`	Yes
`page_id`	Yes
`confirmation_token`	No
`backup_meta_key`	No
`css_flush`	No
`mutated`	No
`warnings`	No
`verification`	No
`widget_id`	Yes
`new_parent_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructive (mutation) and non-idempotent. Description adds 'Re-reads to confirm new parent. Two-call confirmation.', providing behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences, no fluff, front-loaded. Every word adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Output schema exists but not shown. Description covers the core behavior and re-read confirmation but omits details about the confirmation parameter and return value. Adequate but not comprehensive for a 6-param mutation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 17% (only position has description). Description mentions new_parent and position but does not explain site_id, page_id, widget_id, or the confirmation parameter. Fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Move a widget to a different parent (or different position in the same parent)'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like duplicate_widget, swap_widget_type, delete_widget.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for moving widgets but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of when not to use or direct comparison to siblings.

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