Create Web Page

Update Page Theme

page.theme.update

Idempotent

Apply a partial theme patch. Theme fields are enum-constrained (button variant/radius/shadow, font family/weight, density, icon_size). Use presets.list first if the user wants a complete restyle. For already-published pages, this saves an unpublished latest revision only. Do not call page.publish in the same assistant turn after this edit. Stop and tell the user the draft/preview was updated, then wait for a separate user message that explicitly asks to update the live link, publish, or make the changes public before calling page.publish. Do NOT call page.unpublish either — the live page should stay public; only unpublish when the user explicitly asks to take it down.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`theme`	Yes	Partial theme patch. Provide only fields you want to change.
`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No	Plain-language instruction explaining that an edit to an already-published page is draft-only and must not be published until a later explicit user request.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

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description reveals critical behavior: for published pages, it saves only an unpublished latest revision. It also warns against calling publish/unpublish prematurely, adding workflow context not present in annotations. No contradiction exists.

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 longer than average, but every sentence delivers essential information. It is front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage warnings and workflow constraints. Though somewhat dense, it remains structured and readable, earning a high score for effective use of 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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested theme object, partial updates, published vs. draft behavior), the description covers the core workflow and constraints well. However, the omission of editToken semantics leaves a gap for agents trying to construct valid calls. Output schema exists, so return values are not needed. Overall, highly complete but with one notable missing parameter.

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 coverage is only 33%, with pageId and editToken lacking descriptions. The description adds little about parameters—it mentions enum-constrained fields but does not explain editToken's purpose or the significance of pageId. The theme parameter is well-covered by the schema, but the description fails to compensate for the undocumented 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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Apply a partial theme patch.' It clearly identifies the tool's scope (theme fields) and distinguishes it from a complete restyle by recommending presets.list. This provides unambiguous purpose and differentiation from sibling tools like page.meta.update.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool versus an alternative: 'Use presets.list first if the user wants a complete restyle.' It also provides strong contextual guidance on when NOT to call page.publish or page.unpublish, requiring explicit user intent. This is exceptional usage 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?