Skip to main content
Glama

modx_update_provider

Update an existing transport provider in MODX by setting its name, API key, username, service URL, or description. Use it to correct provider configuration without recreating the provider.

Instructions

Update a transport provider.

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_provider"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
nameNo
api_keyNo
usernameNo
descriptionNo
service_urlNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.4

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
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 of behavioral disclosure, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say whether this is a partial or full replacement update, whether unspecified fields are preserved, whether api_key changes invalidate anything, or what permissions are required for this mutation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The single sentence is short and front-loaded with the verb, so there is no wasted wording. However, brevity here reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication of the necessary information.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no schema descriptions, the description needs to do substantial work and does none. An agent cannot determine update semantics, required permissions, or the meaning of any field from this definition.

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 six parameters, and the description mentions none of them. There is no explanation of what 'id' identifies, whether 'api_key' and 'username' are credential pairs for the transport, or what 'service_url' expects, so the agent gets no semantic help at all.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description states a verb (Update) and a resource (transport provider), which is marginally more than the tool name restated, but it says nothing about what aspect of the provider is being updated. It provides no differentiation from the adjacent modx_create_provider, modx_delete_provider, and modx_list_providers siblings beyond the verb.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus modx_create_provider or modx_delete_provider, nor any mention of prerequisites such as the provider existing or requiring admin permissions. The agent must infer everything from the tool 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