Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_ms2_get_order

Retrieve a miniShop2 order by ID, including items and customer details, to review, fulfill, or support orders.

Instructions

Get a miniShop2 order by id (with items/customer).

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_order"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The parenthetical 'with items/customer' hints at an enlarged payload, but there is no disclosure of permissions/auth requirements, whether a missing id errors or returns empty, or that this is a read of customer PII. For a read tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no wasted words. It is terse to the point of under-specification rather than redundant.

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 read tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description covers only the bare minimum and leaves return details and failure behavior unstated. The 'items/customer' hint is a start but not enough.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single required 'id' parameter, which is only typed as a number. The description confirms an id lookup but doesn't clarify whether it is the order id versus an order number or external reference; with a documented param this would be a 4, but compensation is needed here and isn't provided.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Get a miniShop2 order by id (with items/customer)'. This distinguishes it from the sibling list tool modx_ms2_list_orders by being a single-record fetch. It does not explicitly name siblings, but the singular/plural distinction is clear.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named — nothing tells the agent to use modx_ms2_list_orders to discover ids or modx_ms2_update_order to modify. Usage is only implied by 'by id'.

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