Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_uninstall_package

Uninstall a MODX transport package by signature to remove it from the site when you need to clean up installed packages.

Instructions

Uninstall a transport package by signature (e.g. 'migx-2.13.0-pl').

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": {
      "signature": "<signature>"
    },
    "name": "modx_uninstall_package"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signatureYes

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 carries the full burden for a destructive mutation. It does not disclose whether package files and namespace/schema changes are removed, whether the action is reversible, what permissions are required, or what happens if the signature is unknown. Only the identifier format is 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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the example inline where it is most useful. Nothing wasted, though there is very little content overall.

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 destructive, unannotated package-management tool with no output schema, the description omits consequences, return behavior, and error conditions. An agent would be guessing about the impact of calling it.

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 add meaning by showing the signature format ('migx-2.13.0-pl'). However, it never says where to obtain a valid signature or whether partial/version-less signatures are accepted, leaving the single required parameter only partly specified.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Uninstall a transport package') and narrows it by signature. The example signature clarifies the identifier format. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling modx_install_package or point at where signatures come from (e.g., modx_list_installed_components).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The reader must infer that this is the inverse of modx_install_package and that signatures come from a listing tool. No prerequisites, cautions, or alternatives are named.

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