Uscreen MCP Server and API by Cotlet

Create live event in Uscreen

uscreen_create_live_event

Read-onlyIdempotent

Create live event in the user's own Uscreen account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Uscreen step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Uscreen Cloud Browser. Uscreen's official API: Yes, in part: Uscreen has a Publisher API for stores on UscreenPlus that manages customers, access, subscriptions, groups and invoices and only reads videos, collections and live events (checked 11 Oct 2026).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "uscreen_create_live_event"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'opens nothing by itself,' which removes any fear of an unintended write. It also discloses the return shape (screens, buttons, fields) despite there being no output schema. It omits session/auth prerequisites for the browser step, so not a 5.

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 operative content is front-loaded well, but the trailing paragraph about Uscreen's Publisher API, complete with a 'checked 11 Oct 2026' date stamp, is tangential trivia for a tool that just emits UI steps. It is relevant as justification for the browser-based approach, yet it dilutes an otherwise tight definition.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (screens, buttons, fields) and what to do next, which is the essential context. What is missing is prerequisite state, e.g. that the user must be signed in to Uscreen before the browser steps will work.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not misrepresent any inputs.

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 names a specific verb and resource (create a live event in the user's Uscreen account) and immediately clarifies the actual mechanism: it returns step-by-step UI instructions rather than performing the write. The opening verb 'Create' is slightly at odds with the real behavior, but the clarification arrives in the same sentence so an agent is not left guessing.

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 explicitly routes the agent to the alternative: 'then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Uscreen Cloud Browser,' which makes the two-step workflow unambiguous against the many cotlet_browser_* siblings. It does not state when NOT to use it or what prerequisites (an open Uscreen session) are required, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Uscreen MCP Server and API by Cotlet tools Inspect

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

Need Help?