Skip to main content
Glama

Sitey — free subdomains

by my.sitey
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_subdomain

Create a new DNS record for a subdomain. Supports A records (IP address), CNAME records (hostname) and REDIRECT records (an https:// URL — visitors to the name are sent there with a 301). Example: create demo.sitey.my pointing to 1.2.3.4. No account, API key or signup is needed. The target does not have to be serving yet: claim the name first and deploy to it second if that is your order. The result carries reachable:false when nothing answered, and the record is created either way. If you send no owner_token, the result carries a new one under 'owner_token' — save it, it is shown once and is the only way to change or delete this record later. Without an API key, a CNAME or REDIRECT may not point at a temporary tunnel (trycloudflare.com, ngrok and the like), names containing words such as login or wallet are refused with ACCOUNT_REQUIRED, and TXT records are not available.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesRecord type. REDIRECT answers every visit with a 301 to the URL in value.
valueYesRecord value: an IPv4 address for A, a hostname for CNAME, an absolute https:// URL for REDIRECT (http:// is refused, and so is a URL under one of this service's own roots).
domainYesRoot domain (e.g. 'sitey.my')
subdomainYesSubdomain name (e.g. 'demo')
owner_tokenNoThe owner token you were given when you created the record (starts with anon_). Omit it only if you have an API key, or if the record predates tokens and was claimed from this same IP address. Creating without one mints a new one and returns it once.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Record type"New value: +"Record type. REDIRECT answers every visit with a 301 to the URL in value."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "A",
-  "CNAME"
-]New value: +[
+  "A",
+  "CNAME",
+  "REDIRECT"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / value / description
      Previous value: -"Record value (IP for A, hostname for CNAME)"New value: +"Record value: an IPv4 address for A, a hostname for CNAME, an absolute https:// URL for REDIRECT (http:// is refused, and so is a URL under one of this service's own roots)."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Root domain (e.g. 'sitey.one')"New value: +"Root domain (e.g. 'sitey.my')"
    • addedInput schema / properties / owner_token
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The owner token you were given when you created the record (starts with anon_). Omit it only if you have an API key, or if the record predates tokens and was claimed from this same IP address. Creating without one mints a new one and returns it once.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so richly: it discloses the 301 semantics of REDIRECT, that the record is created even when the target does not answer (reachable:false), that owner_token is minted and shown only once, and the ACCOUNT_REQUIRED refusal conditions. This is well beyond what structured fields provide.

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?

Long but front-loaded and dense — the core purpose and example come first, followed by constraints. Every sentence adds operative information (token handling, error codes, reachable flag), though it is on the verbose side.

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, the description must describe returns, and it does (reachable, owner_token), along with the error condition ACCOUNT_REQUIRED. For a 5-parameter creation tool with no annotations, nothing essential for correct invocation 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 real meaning: the owner_token lifecycle ('save it, shown once, only way to change or delete'), the https-only constraint for REDIRECT, and the no-API-key restrictions on CNAME/REDIRECT targets.

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 (Create) and resource (DNS record for a subdomain), then enumerates the exact record types supported (A, CNAME, REDIRECT) with a concrete example. An agent can distinguish this from create_txt_record and update_subdomain immediately.

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?

Gives clear conditions: no account/API key needed, and 'claim the name first, deploy second' ordering advice. It also rules out TXT ('not available'), implicitly routing to create_txt_record. It stops short of explicitly naming the sibling alternative to use instead, so 4 rather than 5.

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

All Sitey — free subdomains toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources