WeChat Mini Program Dev MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

element_getWxml

Retrieve the WXML of a specified element in a WeChat mini program. Optionally, get outer WXML including the element itself.

Instructions

获取元素 WXML。默认获取内部 WXML(element.wxml())，设置 outer 为 true 可获取包含元素本身的 WXML(element.outerWxml())。

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": {
      "selector": "<selector>"
    },
    "name": "element_getWxml"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`connection`	No
`selector`	Yes
`innerSelector`	No
`outer`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.2.4May 14, 2026
Removedv0.1.6Apr 30, 2026
Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.0Jan 3, 2026
- addedInput schema / $schema
```
Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
```
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedNov 27, 2025

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it gets WXML but does not mention whether it is read-only, idempotent, or what happens on errors (e.g., element not found). No side effects or prerequisites are described.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise (two short sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, which slightly reduces its effectiveness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 4 parameters (one required nested object), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to cover connection setup, selector semantics, and return format, leaving the agent with inadequate information to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions 'outer' and its effect. 'connection', 'selector', and 'innerSelector' are not explained, leaving the agent without understanding of their roles or constraints.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves element WXML, distinguishing between inner and outer WXML via the 'outer' parameter. This differentiates it from sibling tools like element_getData or element_getStyles, which retrieve different data.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., element_getAttributes, element_getBoundingClientRect). The description only explains the 'outer' option but provides no context for choosing this tool.

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