Skip to main content
Glama

Create a share link to a slide

create_share_link
Idempotent

Get a short link (/s/) that opens a deck at one slide and click step, for a chat message or follow-up email. Use it to point someone at a specific slide; for the whole deck, use the view URL from get_deck. Needs decks:write because it records the link (60 changes a minute), but it is idempotent: the same deck and position always return the same code. Positions aren't checked against the deck; the deck opens a slide past the end at its nearest one.

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": {
      "deck": "<deck>"
    },
    "name": "create_share_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hNo0-based slide column, as in the deck's #/h/v/click URLs. Default 0.
vNo0-based row within a vertical stack of slides. Default 0.
deckYesThe deck's id (starts with `d`) or its slug, as list_decks returns them; case-insensitive. A deck outside this workspace fails with “No deck …” — call list_decks.
clickNoClick step on that slide; 0 (default) shows it before any reveal.
labelNoA note shown with the link's hits in the stats page. Kept only when the link is first made.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
codeYes
targetYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / click / description
      Previous value: -"Click step on that slide."New value: +"Click step on that slide; 0 (default) shows it before any reveal."
    • changedInput schema / properties / deck / description
      Previous value: -"The deck's id (d…) or its slug, as list_decks shows them."New value: +"The deck's id (starts with `d`) or its slug, as list_decks returns them; case-insensitive. A deck outside this workspace fails with “No deck …” — call list_decks."
    • changedInput schema / properties / h / description
      Previous value: -"0-based slide column."New value: +"0-based slide column, as in the deck's #/h/v/click URLs. Default 0."
    • changedInput schema / properties / label / description
      Previous value: -"A note for the stats page."New value: +"A note shown with the link's hits in the stats page. Kept only when the link is first made."
    • changedInput schema / properties / v / description
      Previous value: -"0-based row in a vertical stack."New value: +"0-based row within a vertical stack of slides. Default 0."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the required decks:write scope, the 60-changes-per-minute throttle, and the idempotency rule (same deck and position return the same code) — explaining why the idempotentHint holds rather than just repeating it. It also discloses that positions aren't validated against the deck and that out-of-range slides snap to the nearest one. It doesn't say what the response payload looks like, but an output schema exists.

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?

Four tight sentences: what you get, when to use it versus the sibling, the auth/rate/idempotency constraints, then the edge case. The most decision-relevant facts are front-loaded and nothing is boilerplate.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a write-with-side-effects tool this covers the things that actually affect correct invocation: permission scope, throughput limit, idempotency, and the no-validation quirk on positions. Return values are covered by the output schema, so nothing material is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds real meaning beyond it by explaining that h/v/click are not checked against the deck and that an out-of-range slide opens at the nearest valid one. It also frames the link format (/s/<code>) the parameters feed into. The extra positional-behavior context justifies the bump above baseline.

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 (get a short /s/<code> link to a deck at a slide and click step) plus the returned artifact, and explicitly distinguishes itself from get_deck, which yields the whole-deck view URL. An agent can tell exactly what it gets back without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names the intended use case (pointing someone at a specific slide in a chat message or email) and the alternative for the other case (use get_deck's view URL for the whole deck). The split between this tool and get_deck is unambiguous.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.