LinkPulse

Suggest an alternative affiliate product URL

suggest_replacement

Given a broken or dead affiliate URL plus the article it sits on, ask Claude (with web search) to find the closest-available alternative product on the same retailer or network. Returns a candidate URL, short reasoning, confidence, and a URL-reachability check. This is the "autonomous fix suggestion" that makes LinkPulse agent-native — the v1.1 apply_fix tool will consume this output directly.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`network`	No	Affiliate network (e.g. Awin, Bol.com, Daisycon) if known.
`broken_url`	Yes	The affiliate URL that is dead or redirecting.
`anchor_text`	No	The visible anchor text of the broken link, if known.
`article_title`	No	Title of the article the link appears on (helps with context).

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full transparency burden. Discloses that tool uses Claude with web search to find alternatives. States return fields, including a URL-reachability check. Does not mention failure modes (e.g., no alternative found) or rate limits, but key behavioral traits are covered.

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?

Three sentences, no redundancy. Front-loaded with action. Each sentence adds value: purpose, method, outcome, and integration. Ideal conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, description lists all return fields. Explains integration with apply_fix. Sibling tools are distinct. All necessary information for an agent to understand and use this tool correctly is present.

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 coverage is 100%, meaning schema already documents all parameters. Description restates parameters without adding new meaning beyond context grouping. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds minimal semantic value over the schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'suggest' with resource 'alternative affiliate product URL'. Clearly states input (broken URL, article) and output (candidate URL, reasoning, confidence, reachability). Distinguishes from siblings like broken_links (detection) and apply_fix (application), making it unique.

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?

Description implies usage when an affiliate URL is broken/dead and article context is available. Mentions that output feeds into apply_fix tool, providing workflow context. Does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives, but context is clear enough.

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

All LinkPulse 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose: at_risk_articles combines broken links with revenue loss, broken_links lists all broken links, revenue_summary gives revenue data, suggest_replacement finds alternatives, and top_articles shows top earners. There is no overlap.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with descriptive terms like adjective_noun (at_risk_articles, broken_links) or verb_noun (suggest_replacement). No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count5/5

5 tools is well-scoped for a server focused on affiliate link management and revenue optimization. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy.

Completeness3/5

The set covers finding broken links, assessing revenue impact, and suggesting replacements, but lacks an 'apply_fix' tool to actually implement changes, which is mentioned as v1.1. Missing update/delete functionality for links.

Resources

Need Help?