Skip to main content
Glama

Postclick by PPC.io: Landing Page CRO

Show the page designs

get_concepts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free. Returns every concept rendered for an audit, each with its image URLs and a link to view it full size, and a runs.active count of how many are still rendering. A pack takes 3 to 8 minutes. While runs.active is above zero, call it with wait set to 300: it holds the connection open and comes back the instant a design lands, the stage moves, or the pack finishes, instead of returning the same half-empty list a dozen times in a row. A design landing is the thing worth interrupting for, and a wait gets it to the user within seconds of it existing. If a call comes back with nothing new, say nothing and call again — repeating a stage you already reported is worse than silence. A partial set is non-terminal: more images are still coming, so it is not the finished set to choose from. Some concepts may be flagged recommended, and often none is. The designs come back as pictures in the reply, not just links: without a concept_id it returns the opening screen of each so they can be compared, and with one it returns that single design as every band in page order, which is the whole page. Any figures, ratings or testimonials drawn into them are placeholders showing where real proof belongs, never the user's own data. Pick a concept_id to build. If the user wants to SEND a design to anyone, use share_page with that concept_id: it gives back one public no-login page of the whole design. Never hand over an app or dashboard link for that, the recipient hits a login wall.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
waitNoSeconds to wait for a material change. Use 25 for broad client compatibility; longer waits are available for hosts that support them. A timeout preserves the run; resume by ID instead of starting again.
audit_idYes
concept_idNoOptional. Given one, returns that design as its full stack of bands in page order instead of one opening screen per design.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial context: free access, 3–8 minute packs, long-poll wait semantics, non-terminal partial results, recommended flags, image return format, and placeholder content. It does not contradict the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with purpose and organized around polling behavior, output format, and alternatives. It is somewhat long and contains advisory repetition, but most sentences carry useful operational information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and rich annotations already covering safety, the description still explains return format, wait behavior, partial non-terminal states, recommended flags, placeholder content, and the share_page alternative. It is complete enough for an agent to call and interpret this tool correctly.

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 67%, and the description adds meaningful operational semantics for wait and concept_id beyond the schema, including wait=300 for active runs and the full-page behavior when concept_id is supplied. audit_id is only implied by context, not explicitly described, so it is strong but not complete.

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 and resource: returns every concept rendered for an audit, with image URLs, a full-size link, and a runs.active count. It also distinguishes the send-a-design case from share_page and the build case via concept_id, so an agent can route correctly.

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 explicit operational guidance: call with wait 300 while runs.active is above zero, avoid repeating stages, treat partial sets as non-terminal, and use share_page when the user wants to send a design. The when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are clearly stated.

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