Help by DeltaBreen

save_form

Idempotent

Save a site's own form as a draft. The site keeps showing what was published before until publish_form.

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": {
      "product_id": "<product_id>",
      "html": "<html>"
    },
    "name": "save_form"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`css`	No	The form's CSS. It applies inside the form only. No @import and no backslashes.
`html`	Yes	The form's HTML. Layout and form tags only; mark the parts with data-help (get_form lists them). Scripts, images, inline styles and handlers are removed.
`product_id`	Yes	The site's id (a uuid), from list_products.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 27, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / css / type
```
Previous value: -[
-  "string",
-  "null"
-]New value: +"string"
```
First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only say this is a non-destructive, idempotent write; the description adds the genuinely non-obvious behavior that the published form keeps serving until publish_form is called. It does not say whether an existing draft is overwritten or whether saved HTML is sanitized (that lives in the schema).

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 short sentences with zero filler; the draft scope leads and the publish relationship follows. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 three-parameter save operation with full schema coverage and annotations, the description supplies the one behavioral fact structured fields cannot express: nothing is visible until publish_form. Overwrite/replace semantics for an existing draft remain unstated, a minor gap.

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 html, css and product_id are already fully documented including sanitization and CSS restrictions. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline here.

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?

"Save a site's own form as a draft" gives a specific verb and resource and states the draft scope up front. The second sentence pins it against publish_form by explaining that saving does not go live. It does not distinguish from adjacent form tools such as set_form_fields or use_simple_form, so it is clear but not fully sibling-differentiated.

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?

The draft-vs-published statement implies the workflow: use this when you want to stage changes without affecting the live form, and use publish_form to go live. That is clear conditional context, but no explicit when-not guidance or prerequisite (e.g., validating with check_form first) is given.

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

All Help by DeltaBreen 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?