McClipFace

Get a shopping link for a product or search page

wrap_link

Read-onlyIdempotent

Takes a product or search page address (url, or urls up to 5) and returns a McClipFace go link to that page, tracked when McClipFace earns from the store (credited false: untracked). url null (blocked store, cart page): don't link it. Use the url as is; never show a raw store link.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wrap_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	A public product or search page address at a store (http or https; never a cart, checkout, account or order page).
`urls`	No	Instead of url: up to 5 such addresses; results come back in the same order.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`note`	No
`reason`	No
`status`	Yes
`network`	No
`results`	No
`credited`	No
`merchant`	No
`disclosure`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 14, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / note
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / note
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / url / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / url / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```
AddedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, yet the description still earns credit by disclosing the tracking semantics ('credited false: untracked') and the null-result failure mode, neither of which is derivable from structured fields. It stops short of mentioning auth requirements, rate limits, or whether links expire.

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?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with the action and followed by constraints and the null case. The compressed punctuation ('credited false: untracked') is slightly harder to scan than plain prose but costs no extra length.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be described, and the description still explains the meaningful returned value and the credit flag. One small gap remains: neither parameter is marked required, and the description never states that at least one of url or urls must be supplied.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented with the cart/checkout/account exclusion and the 5-address cap. The description adds only the 'url null means unlinkable' outcome, which is genuinely useful but is return-value behavior rather than parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb and resource: it takes a product or search page address and returns a McClipFace go link to that page. The branded term 'go link' is immediately qualified with the tracking condition, so an agent understands the output. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like find_product_coupons, leaving that differentiator implicit in the name and title.

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?

Clear when-not guidance is given: when the returned url is null (blocked store or cart page), do not link it, and never surface a raw store link. The batching rule ('url, or urls up to 5') tells the agent which input form to pick. What is missing is any pointer to an alternative tool when linking is not appropriate.

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

All McClipFace 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?