User Intuition

Configure External Panel

configure_external_panel

DestructiveIdempotent

Create or replace a customer-supplied panel bridge on an owned BYOP study. Supply completion and screen-out redirect URLs; set the provider's respondent ID query parameter and placeholder if the defaults differ. Optional session, external study, quota-full, and technical-failure mappings are supported. Before sharing entry_url with the provider, call get_study, verify provisioning_status=provisioned, and have the human approve the current plan and URL mapping. This does not recruit respondents or launch the paid User Intuition Panel. Repeating the same PUT preserves the current entry token.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`provider`	No		custom
`study_id`	Yes
`organization_id`	No	Organization for this operation and billing. Use list_organizations to choose an active membership.
`session_id_param`	No
`respondent_id_param`	No		respondent_id
`complete_redirect_url`	Yes
`screenout_redirect_url`	Yes
`session_id_placeholder`	No
`technical_redirect_url`	No
`external_study_id_param`	No
`quota_full_redirect_url`	No
`respondent_id_placeholder`	No		{{RESPONDENT_ID}}
`external_study_id_placeholder`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	Created or replaced external-panel configuration.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / organization_id / description

Previous value: -"Platform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet."New value: +"Organization for this operation and billing. Use list_organizations to choose an active membership."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 1, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / organization_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Platform admins only: select an organization for this operation. Required when changing another organization’s study or using its wallet.",
+  "maxLength": 128,
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedSep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructive, idempotent, and open-world behavior, and the description adds genuinely new context: the human-approval gate, the read-before-write verification step, and that repeating the same PUT preserves the current entry token. It does not say what an actual config change does to the existing panel or its token, which matters for a destructive replace.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Five sentences, front-loaded with the action, then requirements, then optional mappings, then the safety gate, then scope exclusions. Every sentence adds a distinct constraint or clarification.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 13-parameter destructive mutation with an output schema and full annotations, the description covers scope, prerequisites, approval gate, idempotency, and exclusions. The remaining gap is permission/billing context and the effect of a changed config on the existing token.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 8%, so the description has to carry this dimension. It identifies the required redirect URLs, explains when respondent_id_param and its placeholder need setting, and groups the optional mappings (session, external study, quota-full, technical-failure) — real semantic value, though it never names those parameters or gives placeholder syntax.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Create or replace a customer-supplied panel bridge') plus the scope constraint ('on an owned BYOP study'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools such as get_external_panel, delete_external_panel, regenerate_external_panel_token, and launch_panel.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives explicit prerequisites (call get_study, verify provisioning_status=provisioned, get human approval of the plan and URL mapping before sharing entry_url) and names what the tool does not do (recruit respondents, launch the paid panel). It stops short of naming the exact alternative tool for the paid panel path, so the routing is implied rather than stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All User Intuition tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?