Dropyour

Publish a new drop

dropyour_publish

Publish a self-contained HTML file to Dropyour. Returns a stable public URL (one origin per drop — same address across updates, browser data survives) and a managementToken. KEEP THE TOKEN: it is shown once and is required to replace, configure or delete the drop (with an account token, owned drops are manageable without it). Free, anonymous, no API key. Your tier: anonymous — max 5 MB, default expiration 30 days. Drops are private by default (link-only).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`html`	Yes	The complete self-contained HTML content (inline CSS/JS, max 5 MB)
`name`	No	A private name for this drop (only you see it, in Your drops). Default: the HTML <title>.
`tags`	No	Private tags to organize/filter this drop in Your drops (only you see them).
`publishAt`	No	Scheduled go-live (ISO datetime). Until then the drop returns 404 as if it did not exist. Must be future and before expiration.
`expiresInSeconds`	No	Expiration in seconds — any value from 3600 (1h) up to your tier's max (2592000). Default: your tier's (30 days)

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say non-destructive and non-idempotent; description goes far beyond by disclosing the one-origin stable URL behavior, browser data survival, one-time token requirement, anonymous/free tier limits (5 MB, 30-day default), and private-by-default visibility. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Five tightly scoped sentences, each carrying load: operation, result, critical token warning, tier constraints, privacy default. No filler; warnings are front-loaded after the primary outcome.

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 publish tool with no output schema, the description explains return values (URL, token), security expectations (token shown once), availability constraints (free/anonymous), and default behavior (private, 30-day expiration). It omits explicit error/edge-case behavior, but the schema covers parameter constraints and scheduling, making it complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

All 5 parameters have 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents them. The description adds relevant operational constraints (max 5 MB, 30-day default expiration, private-by-default) but these mostly restate schema field descriptions; it does not add new meaning per parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States the exact operation ('Publish a self-contained HTML file') and the resource (Dropyour drop). It differentiates from siblings by focusing on creating a new drop and describing the result (public URL, managementToken), and by noting the token is needed for later replace/configure/delete.

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?

Provides clear context: this is the anonymous, keyless way to publish a new drop, with tier limits and privacy defaults. It implies the token is used for subsequent management, but does not explicitly name siblings like dropyour_replace or dropyour_delete as alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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

All Dropyour 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

A4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target clearly distinct resources and actions, and descriptions do a good job separating overlapping areas like call/release/status or read_content/read_app_files. The main risk is momentary confusion between publish/replace/release and the two read-content tools, but careful reading resolves it.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names share the dropyour_ prefix and use snake_case, but the overall pattern is mixed: read_* and list_versions use verb-first naming, while records_list, secret_set, secret_delete, and secrets_list use noun-first naming, and logs/status/whoami are bare nouns. Still readable, but not a consistent verb_noun convention.

Tool Count3/5

23 tools is on the heavy side for a single server and spans several distinct subdomains: drop lifecycle, graduated apps, data, records, secrets, scheduling, and auth. Each tool appears purposeful, but the surface could reasonably be split into focused servers.

Completeness5/5

The set covers the full drop lifecycle — publish, replace, release, rollback, delete, status, settings — plus graduated app concerns like files, logs, versions, store records, app data, secrets, and scheduling. There are no obvious dead ends for the stated domain.

Resources

Need Help?