Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MODX MCP

MODX MCP

by rumata-estor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

modx_update_access_policy_template

Modify an existing MODX access policy template by ID to change its name or description, keeping CMS permissions aligned with current roles and requirements.

Instructions

Update an access policy template.

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_update_access_policy_template"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameNo
descriptionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

D1.3/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that this is a mutation, whether it requires admin permissions, whether omitted fields are preserved or cleared, or what happens on an invalid id. Nothing beyond the bare verb is disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is short and front-loaded, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than economy. There is no wasted wording because there is almost no wording at all.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a mutation tool with three undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly. It is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across three parameters (id, name, description), and the description supplies no meaning for any of them. It does not clarify that id identifies the template to modify or that name/description are the mutable fields, leaving the schema entirely undocumented.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update an access policy template' restates the tool name almost verbatim, adding no scope, no field detail, and no differentiation from siblings such as modx_update_access_policy or modx_create_access_policy_template. It is a tautology rather than a specification.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives like modx_update_access_policy or modx_get_access_policy_template. The agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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