LivePage · 活页

Preview delivery materials

preview_downloads

Read-onlyIdempotent

After creating an upload session, compare the proposed manifest with the current version before finalizing. Returns added, removed, replaced and missing files, the full list and a basis token. Omitted downloads inherit explicit current settings; a first version defaults to none; [] clears the list. Resolve missing files explicitly. Pass basis as download_basis to finalize_upload to detect concurrent changes. The CLI handles this step.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`manifest`	Yes
`version_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 11, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / manifest / properties / chrome

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "default": {
+      "enum": [
+        "open",
+        "collapsed"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "handle": {
+      "enum": [
+        "top-right",
+        "top-left",
+        "bottom-right",
+        "bottom-left"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds real context: the exact return contents (added/removed/replaced/missing plus a basis token), the concurrency-detection purpose of the basis token, and inheritance/clearing semantics for downloads. It does not mention auth or rate-limit behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and each subsequent sentence adds distinct information (return values, field semantics, concurrency, CLI note). It is dense but largely waste-free; a minor deduction for the slightly clipped telegraphic style of the download-semantics sentence.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a complex tool with a large nested schema, 0% parameter documentation and no output schema, the description covers the workflow and return shape well but leaves the bulk of the manifest structure unexplained. It is adequate but has a clear gap in documenting the input surface an agent must construct.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for a two-parameter tool whose manifest is a large nested object. The description explains only the semantics of the downloads field (omitted inherit current settings, first version defaults to none, [] clears) and says nothing about version_id or the many other manifest fields (title, entry, kind, cta, etc.), so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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 gives a specific verb+resource: compare the proposed manifest against the current version and report added/removed/replaced/missing files. It clearly distinguishes itself from write siblings (set_downloads, finalize_upload) by being a preview/diff step, though the 'manifest vs downloads' naming leaves a slight ambiguity about scope.

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?

It states the workflow context explicitly: 'After creating an upload session... before finalizing' and 'Pass basis as download_basis to finalize_upload to detect concurrent changes,' naming the follow-on tool. It also notes 'The CLI handles this step,' which hints at when an agent might skip it, but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use case is given.

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

All LivePage · 活页 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?