Foliyo

Check a Foliyo before publishing

preflight_html

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate HTML (static by default, or interactive:true for the sandboxed mode) and inline explicit image/font/CSS assets without publishing. Returns ready and issues; the prepared HTML is returned only when includeHtml is true. publish_html runs the same checks, so this is optional. Does not visually render or fetch external URLs.

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": {
      "html": "<html>"
    },
    "name": "preflight_html"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Existing page to check for accidental content removal.
`html`	Yes
`assets`	No
`includeHtml`	No	Also return the prepared HTML. Off by default to keep the reply small.
`interactive`	No	Check as an interactive page (scripts kept, sandbox rules applied) instead of static.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedInput schema / properties / assets / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / includeHtml

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Also return the prepared HTML. Off by default to keep the reply small.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / interactive

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Check as an interactive page (scripts kept, sandbox rules applied) instead of static.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Existing page to check for accidental content removal.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description still adds real behavioral context: it returns 'ready and issues,' returns prepared HTML only when includeHtml is true, and performs no rendering or external fetching. It stops short of describing issue severity/format or size limits, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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?

A single dense paragraph with the core action and default behavior front-loaded, followed by return behavior and then exclusions. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant with the name or title.

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 no output schema and five parameters, the description does the needed work: it names the return fields (ready, issues), the conditional payload, and the checking modes. The only shortfall is the undocumented `id` parameter and no hint of what 'issues' contains, which matters for an agent deciding whether to act on results.

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?

Schema coverage is 60%, and the description compensates by explaining the two mode-defining parameters (interactive sandbox vs static) and what assets means in practice (inline explicit image/font/CSS assets), plus the conditional includeHtml return. It never mentions the `id` parameter's purpose (accidental content removal), leaving one documented gap to 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?

States a specific verb (validate) and resource (HTML/foliyo), the two operating modes (static by default, interactive:true sandbox), and what happens to assets (inlined). It also explicitly separates itself from publish_html, which runs the same checks, so an agent can distinguish it from the nearest sibling without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit use/avoid signal: 'publish_html runs the same checks, so this is optional,' plus the exclusion 'Does not visually render or fetch external URLs.' That tells the agent both when this tool is worth calling and what it will not catch.

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

All Foliyo 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?