Tessryx

Preview dynamic endpoint

preview_dynamic_endpoint

Destructive

Render what a dynamic endpoint serves WITHOUT publishing — runs the endpoint's workflow through the full serve path (input + bound datafile + content-type) and returns the response, so you can preview a DRAFT before publishing (or verify any version). Omit version to preview the latest draft; pass a version to preview that one. For a :param endpoint (e.g. 'post/:slug'), pass sample params (e.g. {"slug":"hello"}) — they run through the definition's input_transform, so you can preview a specific URL and confirm a good value renders and a bad one fails input validation. This executes the workflow (may have side effects). Returns content_type, output (decoded as a string), the run status (status=failed with a message when the render did not succeed), the run_id (drill into the full run/traces with get_workflow_run_traces), and resolved_input (the $input the transform produced, for debugging the mapping).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	No	the endpoint slug (provide this or endpoint_id)
`params`	No	sample path parameters for a :param endpoint (e.g. {"slug":"hello"} for a 'post/:slug' endpoint); fed to the definition's input_transform to build $input, so you can preview a specific URL and confirm it passes the workflow's input_schema
`version`	No	specific version to preview; omit (0) for the latest version (the draft)
`endpoint_id`	No	the endpoint id (provide this or slug)
`viewer_email`	No	simulated viewer's email, bound as auth.email. Only takes effect when the endpoint has a role allowlist (auth.allow.tenant_roles) — that is the only case where a real address reaches a workflow, so a preview without one ignores this, exactly as serving would
`viewer_roles`	No	simulated viewer's roles in this workspace, bound as auth.roles (e.g. ["ROLE_ADMIN"]) so you can preview role-gated rendering. Like viewer_email, only takes effect on an endpoint with a role allowlist
`viewer_user_id`	No	simulate a signed-in viewer for previewing a gated endpoint that exposes identity: the derived auth.viewer_id is computed from this, so the preview shows the real identifier. Omit it and a visible placeholder stands in. Ignored unless the endpoint gates and exposes identity

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`output`	Yes
`run_id`	No
`status`	Yes
`message`	No
`content_type`	Yes
`resolved_input`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true/readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces this by stating 'This executes the workflow (may have side effects)' rather than hiding it. It also discloses the full serve path (input + datafile + content-type), failure semantics (status=failed with a message), and that params run through input_transform, adding real context beyond the structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and constraint, then flows into scope selection and the :param case. It is dense but each sentence carries information; minor redundancy with the schema on return values (content_type, run_id, resolved_input) despite an output schema existing keeps it from a 5.

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?

For a 7-param executable tool with side effects, the description covers scope selection, param handling, auth simulation caveats, failure behavior, and where to drill down. An output schema exists, so return-value detail is a bonus rather than a requirement; nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics: omit-version = latest draft vs. pass-version behavior, params flowing through input_transform to build $input, and the conditional effect of viewer_email/viewer_roles (only on role-allowlisted endpoints) and viewer_user_id (placeholder when omitted). This goes beyond restating field descriptions.

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 (render/preview) and resource (dynamic endpoint), and immediately clarifies the critical distinction: it runs the full serve path WITHOUT publishing. An agent can separate this from publish_dynamic_endpoint and get_dynamic_endpoint without opening the 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?

Explicitly states when to use it (preview a DRAFT before publishing, or verify any version), how to select scope (omit version for latest draft, pass a version for that one), and routes drill-down to the sibling get_workflow_run_traces. Also covers the :param special case and why to pass sample params.

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

All Tessryx 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?