dochost

Get one of my dochost pages

get_page

Read-only

Get one of your pages by slug: title, format, status, view/like counts, expiry, whether it is password-protected, and its current visibility / indexing / branding state. Never returns the page body or the password — call get_page_content when you need the source itself, and set_page_options to change any of the settings it reports.

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": {
      "slug": "<slug>"
    },
    "name": "get_page"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes
`url`	Yes
`slug`	Yes
`likes`	No
`title`	No
`views`	No
`format`	No
`public`	No
`status`	No
`createdAt`	No
`expiresAt`	No
`permanent`	No
`searchable`	No
`hasPassword`	No
`brandingHidden`	No	Whether the RENDERED page hides the dochost mark, resolved from the live plan — not a per-page setting. Read-only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 20, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / brandingHidden

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Whether the RENDERED page hides the dochost mark, resolved from the live plan — not a per-page setting. Read-only.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / public
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```
addedOutput schema / properties / searchable
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
```

Changed1 schema field changedJun 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "createdAt": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "expiresAt": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "format": {
+      "enum": [
+        "markdown",
+        "html"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "hasPassword": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "likes": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "permanent": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "views": {
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "slug",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJun 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it never returns the page body or password, which is useful. However, it doesn't mention potential errors (e.g., slug not found, permission issues) or pagination (not relevant here). 3 is appropriate given annotations already cover the read-only behavior.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured. It front-loads the purpose and the key information (what fields are returned), then adds the important exclusions and alternatives. Every sentence contributes to the agent's decision-making. No fluff.

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?

Given the tool is simple (1 param), has an output schema (which presumably explains return structure), and annotations cover safety, the description is quite complete. It lists the returned fields and clarifies it does not return the body or password. Slight gap: it doesn't mention the output schema's content or possible error behavior, but the output schema likely covers that. Overall, a very effective description for its complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The description explains that the single parameter 'slug' is used to identify the page, and it implies the format and constraints (max length 64, min length 1) from the schema. The description adds the meaning of the parameter (page identifier) and its role in retrieving the specific page.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a page by slug and enumerates the specific fields it returns (title, format, status, counts, expiry, password-protection, visibility/indexing/branding). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by mentioning get_page_content and set_page_options.

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?

The description provides strong usage guidance: it tells the agent when to use this tool (to get page metadata/state) and when to use alternatives (get_page_content for the body, set_page_options to change settings). This explicit routing is exemplary.

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

All dochost 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.