Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_help

Lists built-in MODX help topics or returns a topic guide, helping agents learn workflows, components, and access rules before unfamiliar work.

Instructions

Built-in documentation. Call with no args to list topics; pass {topic} for a guide (e.g. 'tv_input_types', 'study_component', 'minishop2', 'migx', 'acl', 'getting_started'). Read the relevant topic before unfamiliar work, or to learn how to use a newly-installed component.

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_help"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNoHelp topic; omit to list topics.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the whole burden, and it does disclose the two-mode behavior and the shape of the result (a topic list vs. a guide). It does not say what happens for an unknown topic or whether the content is static or version-aware.

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 default no-arg behavior, followed by the argument form and the usage trigger. No filler and no restatement of the tool name.

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

Completeness5/5

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

A one-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema needs exactly this much: modes, example topics, and a usage trigger. Nothing an agent must know to call it correctly is missing.

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 100% and the single param is optional, so the schema already fully documents it. The description adds slightly useful example values ('minishop2', 'migx', 'acl'), but not conventions like casing, exact match requirements, or whether partial names resolve — baseline 3.

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 the resource plainly ("Built-in documentation") and describes both operating modes: no args lists topics, a {topic} argument returns a guide. That is enough to separate it from every operational sibling in the modx_* family, though the verb is implicit rather than stated.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use triggers: "before unfamiliar work" and "to learn how to use a newly-installed component." It omits any when-not guidance, which matters because it overlaps with dedicated tools such as modx_list_tv_input_types (the description advertises a 'tv_input_types' topic instead).

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