Concrete CMS MCP Server

get_page_content

Read-only

Reads a Concrete CMS page as a document, returning sanitized HTML, raw HTML, and plain text for summarizing or reviewing page copy. Use it instead of fetching content by page ID.

Instructions

Review a Concrete CMS page as a document. Returns sanitized HTML, raw HTML, and plain text. Prefer this over getPageById with includes=content when summarizing or reading page copy. Does not return areas/blocks.

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": {
      "pageID": "<pageID>"
    },
    "name": "get_page_content"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pageID`	Yes	ID of the page to read
`version`	No	Page version to read. Defaults to active.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0-alpha.1Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, and the description adds useful behavior: three output representations and the explicit omission of areas/blocks. It stops short of mentioning payload size, permissions, or how the 'recent' version differs from 'active', so it is strong but not fully transparent.

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, with the core action and return formats front-loaded before the sibling routing hint. Every sentence contributes either scope, output, or disambiguation; nothing is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the necessary work of naming the three return representations, and it covers scope limits relative to sibling tools. It lacks detail on the response structure (field names, how large pages are handled), which would be the remaining gap for a two-parameter read tool.

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%, with both pageID and the version enum documented in the schema, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description adds no additional semantics about what the version choice changes in the returned content, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Review a Concrete CMS page as a document') and immediately names the return formats (sanitized HTML, raw HTML, plain text). It also delimits scope by stating it does not return areas/blocks, which separates it cleanly from the block-level siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names the alternative ('getPageById with includes=content') and the condition that selects this tool ('when summarizing or reading page copy'). The closing exclusion ('Does not return areas/blocks') tells the agent when to route elsewhere, so both when and when-not are covered.

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