Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_list_lexicon_entries

Lists MODX lexicon entries filtered by namespace, topic, and language, with optional search plus start/limit pagination for locating translation strings.

Instructions

List lexicon entries, filtered by namespace + topic + language (and optional search).

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_list_lexicon_entries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
startNo
topicNo
searchNo
languageNo
namespaceNo

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?

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it only implies read-only via the verb "List." It says nothing about pagination defaults, result ordering, whether all three filters are combined with AND, permission requirements, or what happens when no filters are given.

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 filler; the parenthetical for optional search is slightly awkward but the filtering intent is immediately readable. Nothing in it is wasted text.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a six-parameter tool with zero schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is thin: it leaves pagination undocumented and gives no idea of the shape or size of the returned entry list. An agent could call it, but would be guessing on paging and result format.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does name four of the six parameters (namespace, topic, language, search). However, limit and start are never mentioned, and no value formats or combination semantics are given for the ones that are named.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ("List lexicon entries") and enumerates the filter dimensions, which distinguishes it from the sibling modx_list_lexicon_topics and the mutating modx_set_lexicon_entry. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings, so it is clear but not fully differentiating.

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?

It states what can be filtered but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over modx_list_lexicon_topics or modx_list_namespaces, and no prerequisites or exclusions. An agent must infer the use case purely from the name and filter list.

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