Create Web Page

Create Landing Page

page.create

Create a hosted link-in-bio page draft from a style preset. Provide title, displayName, and a preset (or 'auto' to infer from businessType/style). The page starts with empty placeholder blocks for you to fill in via block.update — do not invent content. This tool intentionally creates a draft only and does not return a publish action. After calling it, stop and show the preview URL. Do not call page.publish in the same turn unless the user's current message explicitly asks to publish, make the page live, or get a public share link. Anonymous demo pages expire unless claimed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`bio`	No	Optional short bio for the header.
`slug`	No	Preferred public URL slug.
`style`	No	Free-form style hint used by preset:auto inference.
`title`	Yes	Internal page title and default header display_name.
`layout`	No	Layout id. Defaults to 'link_in_bio'.
`preset`	Yes	Style preset id, or 'auto' to infer deterministically from businessType/style.
`displayName`	No	Visible header display name. Defaults to title.
`businessType`	No	Used by preset:auto inference. Examples: musician, restaurant, designer.
`initialPrompt`	No

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No	Plain-language instruction explaining that an edit to an already-published page is draft-only and must not be published until a later explicit user request.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

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate non-readOnly, non-openWorld, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: the page starts with empty placeholder blocks, content must not be invented, it only creates a draft, and anonymous demo pages expire unless claimed. This goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 description is moderately long but every sentence carries important guidance (draft-only, placeholder blocks, publish restriction, expiry). It is front-loaded with the core purpose. A minor reduction from 5 because the 'stop and show the preview URL' instruction could be seen as operational repeat of tool behavior, though it is still useful.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, draft flow, publish interaction, expiration), the description covers all essential behavioral aspects: what the tool does, what it does not do (publish), how to proceed after, and a caveat about anonymous pages. An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed. The description is complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

The schema already describes all 9 parameters with 89% coverage. The description adds value by explaining the relationship between title/displayName/preset and the 'auto' inference from businessType/style, which is not evident from the schema alone. Slightly above baseline due to this added guidance.

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 description opens with 'Create a hosted link-in-bio page draft from a style preset,' which specifies the verb (create), resource (hosted link-in-bio page draft), and source (style preset). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like page.create_from_brief and page.publish by emphasizing the draft-only nature.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool (creating a draft) and when not to call page.publish in the same turn unless the user explicitly asks to publish. It also provides guidance on next steps ('stop and show the preview URL') and mentions an alternative tool (block.update) for filling content.

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?