Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HelpRange

by com.helprange
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Create a share link

create_link

Create a new tracked share link for a document with its own settings (download, passcode, expiry, views limit, watermark, e-mail gate, forwarding). Returns the URL to send.

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": {
      "document_id": "<document_id>"
    },
    "name": "create_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
labelNoWho the link is for, e.g. "ACME – Anna" (shown in statistics)
passcodeNoPassword the viewer must enter
watermarkNoWatermark pages with the viewer's e-mail and date
expires_onNoLast day the link works, YYYY-MM-DD
document_idYes
views_limitNoMaximum number of views
require_emailNoAsk for the viewer's e-mail before opening
allow_downloadNoAllow download & print (default false)
disallow_forwardingNoOnly the first person who opens it can use it
one_viewer_at_a_timeNoOnly one person can view at the same time

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare write, non-idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds only that the call returns the URL to send, which is helpful given there is no output schema, but it says nothing about permissions required, whether the link is immediately live, or that repeated calls create additional distinct links (the practical consequence of non-idempotency).

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?

Two tight sentences: the operation and its configurable dimensions are front-loaded, and the return value closes the description. Nothing is repeated or padded.

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?

With 10 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers the essentials plus the return value. It leaves minor but real gaps: no prerequisites (document must be accessible), no note that unspecified settings default rather than inherit, and no clarification of how disallow_forwarding differs from one_viewer_at_a_time.

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 90%, so the schema already explains each setting (passcode, watermark, expiry, views limit, e-mail gate, forwarding). The description's parenthetical list of settings largely restates those field names and adds no format or interaction details beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new tracked share link for a document') and lists the per-link settings it governs, so an agent can tell it apart from list_links or get_document_stats. It does not name a sibling or state what makes a link 'tracked', but the operation itself is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the tool for generating a shareable link with custom restrictions. There is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-not guidance, no mention that a document must already exist, and no note on what to do if a link already exists for that document.

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

All HelpRange 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