Fictura

Create a tracking link

create_tracking_link

Creates a tracking link and returns its shareable URL. A tap is logged as a click, then redirected to destination_url with the click's id, which is how an install is credited to the link. Use the store address for a real campaign, or the app's own scheme (myapp://) for a link that opens the app in a test. Creates a new link each time; nothing existing changes. Needs read and edit access.

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "destination_url": "<destination_url>"
    },
    "name": "create_tracking_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	What the link is for, shown on the Links page
`slug`	No	Vanity slug, 3 to 50 letters and digits. Leave out for a random one.
`provider`	No	Media source in lowercase, like tiktok
`campaign_id`	No	Campaign name or id
`play_store_url`	No	Google Play address, for the install referrer
`deep_link_value`	No	Where in the app to send the person
`destination_url`	Yes	Where a tap goes: a store address, a web page or myapp://

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds substantive context: 'Creates a new link each time; nothing existing changes' corroborates non-destructiveness and non-idempotency, 'Needs read and edit access' states an auth prerequisite, and the click-logging/redirect mechanic explains runtime behavior of the created artifact. It stops short of describing rate limits or the exact URL format returned.

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?

The core action and return value are front-loaded, and subsequent sentences cover mechanics, usage choice, side effects, and permissions in a logical order. It is dense with useful information rather than padded, though the click-crediting sentence could be tightened slightly.

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 seven-parameter write tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value (shareable URL), the non-destructive/non-idempotent nature, the auth requirement, and the destination_url choice. Some parameters such as slug, provider, and campaign_id are left entirely to the schema, which is acceptable at 100% coverage.

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 coverage is 100%, so every one of the seven parameters is already documented in the schema, and the store-address vs myapp:// guidance the description provides duplicates the destination_url schema text. The description does add indirect meaning by explaining that a click id carries the install credit, which hints at why play_store_url exists, but the parameter-level detail itself adds little over the schema.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource plus the return value: 'Creates a tracking link and returns its shareable URL.' No sibling tool creates tracking links, so the agent can immediately distinguish it from the read-only analytics, plan, and campaign tools in the sibling list.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'Use the store address for a real campaign, or the app's own scheme (myapp://) for a link that opens the app in a test' gives clear guidance on how to choose destination_url for different scenarios. However, it offers no guidance on when to call this tool versus siblings, and no exclusions or prerequisites are named beyond the access requirement.

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

All Fictura tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?