Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_list_providers

Lists available MODX transport providers, including modx.com and custom sources like modstore.pro, with their IDs, names, and service URLs for selection and configuration.

Instructions

List transport providers (modx.com and custom, e.g. modstore.pro): id, name, service_url.

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_providers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. "List" signals a non-mutating read and it discloses the returned fields (id, name, service_url), which is useful, but it says nothing about ordering, result size, empty sets, or any permission requirements for reading provider configuration.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the parenthetical scope example, then the returned fields. Every clause carries information and there is no filler.

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 present, listing the three returned fields is exactly the right compensation and makes the tool callable without follow-up questions. Only minor gaps remain, such as whether the list is complete or paginated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond confirming that no filtering input is expected. It correctly spends its words on output fields instead of inventing parameter context.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ("List transport providers") and even scopes the domain by naming the two provider kinds, modx.com and custom ones like modstore.pro. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling mutation tools (modx_create_provider, modx_update_provider, modx_delete_provider), though it never explicitly names them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery call that precedes create/update/delete of providers, but the description states no when-to-use condition, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. For a zero-parameter read this is low-risk, but the guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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