Create Web Page

Get Landing Page

page.get

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a landing page draft, including its latest content JSON. For anonymous demo pages, include the editToken.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pageId`	Yes
`editToken`	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No	Plain-language instruction explaining that an edit to an already-published page is draft-only and must not be published until a later explicit user request.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

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: that the operation returns the latest content JSON and that anonymous demo pages require an editToken. This is relevant behavioral detail without contradicting the annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Read a landing page draft') and then adds the only necessary caveat about editToken. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple read tool with a rich output schema and strong annotations, the description is largely complete: it states what is read, what data is included, and when an extra token is needed. It falls slightly short of a 5 because it does not explicitly relate to sibling tools or clarify the 'anonymous demo pages' concept further, though the output schema covers return structure.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the editToken parameter's conditional purpose, but pageId semantics rely solely on its name and UUID format in the schema. Partial compensation is provided, but not complete.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read'), identifies the resource ('landing page draft'), and adds useful scope ('including its latest content JSON'), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like page.preview or account.pages.list.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool (reading a draft) and provides a conditional guideline ('For anonymous demo pages, include the editToken'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select this tool appropriately.

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?