Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Marsell

by com.getmarsell
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Page again

page_again
Destructive

Make it again: makes one landing page again from nothing, as the page's Make it again press does: fresh research, the pages dial's step now, and the facts and words on file now. A draft stays until the new one passes its checks and then replaces it at the same address; a live page stays live and the new one comes as a version to publish. One at a time per page. It spends the owner's tokens, up to the page's makeItAgainUpToTokens from pages_read: say that price and use it only when the owner asks for the page to be made again or rebuilt. It needs an act key, and spends the owner's tokens as the chat's same tool would: say the price before you spend.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "landingId": "<landingId>"
    },
    "name": "page_again"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectNoThe project's id or exact name. Optional when the account has one project.
landingIdYesthe page's id as pages_read lists it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only flag destructive and open-world; the description adds real substance beyond them: draft pages keep the old version until checks pass then get replaced at the same address, live pages stay live and the new page arrives as a version to publish. It also discloses cost (owner's tokens, capped by makeItAgainUpToTokens from pages_read) and an act-key requirement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The key constraint (cost, owner must ask) is front-loaded, but the text is a rambling run-on with awkward coinages like 'the pages dial's step now' and 'Make it again press'. Token-cost guidance is repeated twice in different wording, which wastes space.

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 destructive, token-spending regeneration tool with no output schema, it covers cost, authorization, concurrency, and the draft-vs-live outcome well. It does not describe what is returned (job id, status) or how long the regeneration takes, leaving the agent to guess about follow-up.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the landingId pattern and the optional project fallback. The description only implies that landingId comes from pages_read and adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 states a concrete verb and resource: it makes one landing page again from scratch, with fresh research and current facts/words. That is clearly distinct from page_change (editing) and pages_read (reading), though neither sibling is named. The phrasing 'the pages dial's step now' is obscure and blunts an otherwise specific purpose statement.

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 gives an explicit gating condition: use it only when the owner asks for the page to be made again or rebuilt, and say the price first. It also states the concurrency rule ('one at a time per page'). It does not name page_change as the alternative for smaller edits, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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

All Marsell toolsInspect
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