Skip to main content
Glama

get_embed_snippet

Read-only

Return the code to paste into the site: the script tag (with data-site) that goes just before on every page, the HTML of the schema's forms (including the _hp honeypot and the success/error divs), and the rules. Use the returned HTML as it is and do not change the name values, the data-sitekit-form value or _hp (classes, wording and labels may change). Without form, all forms.

Rules:

  • Keys in the schema (forms[].key, fields[].key) start with a lowercase letter and use only lowercase letters, digits and _, up to 40 characters.

  • An HTML form is . Each input's name must match fields[].key exactly (a name that does not match is not saved).

  • The honeypot <input type="text" name="_hp" ...> inside the form is required. Do not remove it, do not make it visible, and do not use "_hp" as a field key.

  • Wrap the input and label of a field with fields[].show_if (a display condition) in (as in the HTML from get_embed_snippet).

  • Do not write JavaScript, fetch or a form action to submit (https:///sitekit.js submits and shows validation).

  • Do not write notification recipients (email, Slack) in the schema or the HTML. The user sets them under "Notifications" in the admin.

  • Billing values such as plan and account_id cannot be passed to create_site / update_schema (they are ignored or rejected with 400).

  • Going paid or upgrading can be started with plan_set (monthly billing; key scope billing:write). Hand the payment (Checkout) or approval URL it returns to the user. Deploy after plan_status is applied. Yearly billing is a first Checkout only (plan_set with interval "year"; switching a running contract is done by a person in the admin). Lowering or ending a paid plan (plan_downgrade, plan_remove, plan_cancel_change, plan_cancel, plan_resume) needs the user's own key with billing:manage and the contract_version from plan_show; every owner is told. While plan_status says checkout, the user has an unpaid payment page (checkout_url, valid until checkout_expires_at) and no other billing action can run: hand the URL over, or take the page back with plan_cancel_checkout (billing:manage) when the user does not want it. Before an operation that costs money or ends a paid feature, tell the user in one sentence what changes and for how much.

  • Deleting a site (delete_site) takes it offline at once. It can be restored for 30 days (restore_site), but custom domains, Google connections and the paid plan are not restored. Always read the site_version first (get_schema) and get the user's explicit yes.

  • If the user only needs forms, use create_form (a write tool: creates a form and its public page from a template; without site it uses the only site, or creates a dev site when there is none). Hand the returned page_url (public page), qr_url (QR to print) and embed_html (one line to paste into their own site) to the user. Publish or stop with publish_form (a write tool).

  • Labels, titles and options can be in any language (write them in the user's language).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
formNoThe form's key when you want only one (e.g. "contact")
siteYesSite ID (the id from list_sites, e.g. "my-shop")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish a safe read-only, non-destructive operation, and the description adds useful behavioral detail about what is returned and how the returned HTML must be treated. It warns that form names, data-sitekit-form, and _hp must not be changed, which is meaningful context beyond the annotations. It does not contradict the read-only annotation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is well front-loaded, but the description is dominated by a large rules block covering schema key conventions, billing, deletion, and unrelated tools. Much of that content does not belong in get_embed_snippet and makes the definition unnecessarily difficult to scan. The useful signal is buried under substantial global guidance.

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 read-only snippet retrieval tool with full parameter coverage and no output schema, the description explains the returned pieces and the important usage constraints. It is more than complete for invoking the tool correctly. The main weakness is that excessive unrelated rules add noise rather than necessary context.

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 the parameter meanings are already documented in the schema. The description adds only the useful default behavior that omitting form returns all forms, which is implied but reinforced. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries most semantic weight.

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?

The first sentence clearly states a specific verb and output: return the embed code, script tag, forms HTML, and rules. It also clarifies the optional scope with 'Without form, all forms.' It does not consistently distinguish this tool from related retrieval tools, though it later mentions create_form as an alternative for form-only needs.

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 description gives clear calling context: use it to obtain paste-ready embed code, use the returned HTML as-is, and do not alter name values or the honeypot. It also names create_form as an alternative when the user only needs forms. It lacks a direct when-not comparison against other embed/schema retrieval paths, so it is not fully exhaustive.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources