Create Web Page

Claim Demo Page

page.claim

Idempotent

Claim an anonymous demo page into an AUTHENTICATED account. This requires the signed-in user's OAuth — an anonymous chat/agent session cannot call it and will get an OAuth-required error. So in a normal agent conversation, do NOT call this to 'save' a demo page: instead share the claimUrl from the page.create/page.publish result with the user, who opens it, signs in, and keeps the page. Only call page.claim when the request already runs under the owner's OAuth.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pageId`	Yes	The pageId returned by page.create.
`editToken`	Yes	The editToken returned by page.create for the anonymous demo page.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes
`slug`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`pageId`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`actions`	Yes
`content`	No
`claimUrl`	Yes
`editToken`	Yes
`expiresAt`	Yes
`isClaimed`	Yes
`nextSteps`	No	Enrichment hints to present to the user. Address 'required' items before publishing.
`canPublish`	Yes
`previewUrl`	Yes
`isPublished`	Yes
`publishedUrl`	Yes
`missingFields`	No
`publishPolicy`	No	For edit tools on already-published pages, this is wait_for_separate_user_request to prevent same-turn publishing.
`liveUpdateMessage`	No	Plain-language instruction explaining that an edit to an already-published page is draft-only and must not be published until a later explicit user request.
`liveUpdateRequired`	No	True after an edit to an already-published page when the public live page still needs page.publish to reflect the latest revision.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency (idempotentHint=true). The description adds key behavioral context: OAuth requirement, anonymous session error, and that the page becomes associated with the authenticated account. This goes beyond structured data.

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?

Three sentences, all substantive. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains the OAuth constraint and provides the alternative, the third gives the only valid calling context. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool's complexity (OAuth context, security implications) is fully addressed. The description covers the core behavior, the error case, and the correct user-facing flow. Output schema exists, so return value details are not needed. Complete for the task.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both pageId and editToken. The description doesn't add parameter-specific details, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already fully documents the parameters.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Claim') and resource ('anonymous demo page') with a clear destination ('AUTHENTICATED account'). It distinguishes from page.create/page.publish by explaining the claim flow and when not to use it.

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?

Explicitly states when NOT to call (normal agent conversation) and provides alternative (share claimUrl). Also specifies the only valid usage context: when the request runs under the owner's OAuth. This is clear exclusion and alternative guidance.

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

All Create Web Page tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target distinct resources and actions (blocks, accounts, pages), but page.create and page.create_from_brief both create pages, and page.intake.start vs page.onboarding.start/update are overlapping planning helpers. The detailed descriptions help disambiguate, though an agent might still pause on choosing between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase dot-separated resource.action pattern (e.g., block.add, page.publish, account.whoami). Nested resources like page.header.update and page.onboarding.update extend the same rule without mixing conventions.

Tool Count3/5

At 23 tools, the count sits in the borderline 16-25 range. Many tools are specific and justified, but the planning helpers (intake/onboarding) and multiple page creation variants add bulk that could be consolidated.

Completeness3/5

The server covers create, read, update, block management, and publish/unpublish, but misses a page.delete operation, leaving a lifecycle dead-end. Account tools are also minimal, limited to reading/listing without management capabilities.

Resources

Need Help?