Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_ms2_get_option

Retrieve a specific miniShop2 product option by its ID for use in MODX CMS workflows.

Instructions

Read one miniShop2 product option by id.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "modx_ms2_get_option"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

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 bears the full disclosure burden. "Read one ... by id" implies a read-only, single-record lookup, but it says nothing about what happens if the id does not exist, whether the read requires permissions, or whether any side effects occur.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity sits close to under-specification rather than being a model of tight, high-information writing.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry the burden of explaining the returned option shape and how it differs from the product-options tools. Instead, it gives nothing beyond the name-level statement, which is insufficient given that gap.

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% for the single parameter, and the description adds only that the id identifies the option. It does not clarify whether the value is the option's primary key, a product id, or a composite, so an agent could pass the wrong identifier.

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: "Read one miniShop2 product option by id." It scopes the call to a single record, but it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling modx_ms2_get_product_options (options assigned to a product) or modx_ms2_list_options, so an agent could easily pick the wrong one.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The only usage signal is that an id must already be known; nothing says to call modx_ms2_list_options first to discover an id, or that this tool should be avoided when full product option data is needed.

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