Skip to main content
Glama
alokemajumder

wpxmcp

by alokemajumder
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Update a widget

update_widget

Change a widget's settings, move it to a different sidebar, or adjust its position. Provide the widget ID and optional new instance, sidebar, or index.

Instructions

Change a widget's settings or move it to a different sidebar or position.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesWidget id, e.g. "block-3".
sidebarNoMove it to this sidebar.
site_idNoWhich configured WordPress site to act on. Optional — with a single site configured it is used automatically; with several, the default site is used unless you name one. Run list_sites for valid ids.
instanceNoReplacement settings. Read the widget first — this replaces the instance wholesale.
positionNoNew index within the sidebar.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / instance / propertyNames
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / position / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • addedInput schema / properties / position / minimum
      Added value: +-9007199254740991
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), and the description agrees by indicating a mutating move/update operation. It adds the specific relocation behavior, but it does not disclose important side effects like wholesale instance replacement, which only appears in the instance parameter description.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence states the action and the two supported outcomes with no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose.

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 an update operation with fully documented parameters and annotations, the description is largely adequate: it correctly identifies the two allowed outcomes and the schema fills in invocation details. It omits return-value information and the 'read the widget first' prerequisite, but the latter is already captured in the schema and the overall picture is complete enough for an agent to operate.

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 the schema already explains id, sidebar, site_id, instance, and position. The free-text description only maps 'settings' and 'sidebar/position' to those parameters and adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Change') and identifies the resource ('a widget') with concrete modes: changing settings or moving it to another sidebar/position. This distinguishes it from sibling widget tools such as create_widget, delete_widget, and list_widgets.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives. The description never mentions that create_widget is for new widgets, list_widgets should be used first, or that the widget instance should be read before replacing it. The intended use is only implied by the verb 'Change' and the title.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools