Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_clear_tv_values

Preview or delete all stored values for a single TV; without confirm:true it returns only the count. Use within a staged TV deletion workflow after backup.

Instructions

Preview or clear every explicitly stored value for one TV. Safe by default: without confirm:true it only returns the number of stored values. Destructive; use only as part of the staged TV deletion workflow after backup.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "modx_clear_tv_values"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tv_idNo
confirmNoMust be true to actually remove stored values.
tv_nameNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the safe preview default, that confirm:true is what triggers removal, and that the operation is destructive with a backup precondition. It omits permission requirements and whether cleared values are recoverable, which keeps it from a 5.

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, front-loaded with the preview/clear distinction, then the safety mechanism, then the workflow constraint. Every sentence adds information.

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 a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, it usefully states what the preview returns (a count of stored values) and the operational precondition. The remaining gap is how to target the TV and what the clear phase reports back.

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 coverage is only 33% (only confirm is documented), and the description's confirm explanation largely restates that schema text. It never explains the tv_id vs tv_name relationship or that neither is schema-required, leaving the agent to infer how the target TV is identified.

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 gives a precise verb pair (preview/clear) and a precisely scoped resource (every explicitly stored value for one TV), which is clearly distinguishable from siblings such as modx_list_tv_values and modx_update_resource_tvs.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It states when to use it ('only as part of the staged TV deletion workflow after backup') and explains the default preview mode. It does not name the preferred read-only alternative (modx_list_tv_values), so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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