Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_add_user_to_group

Add a MODX user to a user group, optionally assigning a role, to manage permissions and access control.

Instructions

Add a user to a user group, optionally with a role.

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": {
      "user": "<user>",
      "usergroup": "<usergroup>"
    },
    "name": "modx_add_user_to_group"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleNoRole id (optional).
userYesUser id.
usergroupYesUser group id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not disclose whether the call fails if the user is already a member, what permissions are required, whether the role is validated, or what the response contains — significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing behavioral detail.

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?

For a simple three-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits duplicate-membership behavior and permission requirements, which an agent would want before invoking a write operation.

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 all three parameters (user, usergroup, role) are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that role is optional, adding no format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 resource ('Add a user to a user group') plus the optional role, which clearly separates it from siblings like modx_remove_user_from_group and modx_update_group_member. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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 guidance on when to use this versus modx_update_group_member (changing an existing member's role) or modx_remove_user_from_group. The agent must infer the boundary from the tool name alone.

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