Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Youform

by io.github.mkmaker
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Publish form

publish-form-tool
Destructive

Publish a form's draft so the changes go live for respondents at its public URL.

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": {
      "form_slug": "<form_slug>"
    },
    "name": "publish-form-tool"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
form_slugYesThe form's slug.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description usefully adds that this affects the public-facing URL and respondents, but omits whether the previously live version is replaced/lost and whether publishing is reversible — important for a destructive tool.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and followed by the consequence; every clause earns its place and nothing is redundant.

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 one-parameter tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, this is nearly complete — the action and its effect on respondents are clear. A note about draft-state preconditions or irreversibility would close the remaining 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?

Only one parameter (form_slug) with 100% schema description coverage; the description adds nothing about identifier format or whether the slug must reference an existing draft. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Publish a form's draft') plus the concrete effect ('changes go live... at its public URL'). It is clearly distinguishable from all listed siblings, none of which touch publishing, though it does not name a sibling explicitly.

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 clause 'so the changes go live' makes the triggering context clear: use this after draft edits when the live version must be updated. No when-not conditions or alternatives are given, but no sibling competes for this action.

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

All Youform toolsInspect
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