Skip to main content
Glama

Sitey — free subdomains

by my.sitey
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

create_txt_record

Create or update a TXT record for domain verification. Used for services like Vercel (_vercel) and Netlify that require DNS-based ownership proof. The record is placed at the root domain under the prefix you give (e.g. vercel.sitey.my), alongside the other owners' values — that is the name Vercel reads for a subdomain of sitey.my. Needs an account: send an API key from the dashboard (Authorization: Bearer styo…) on the MCP request. Without one this returns ACCOUNT_REQUIRED.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYesTXT record value (the verification token)
domainYesRoot domain (e.g. 'sitey.my')
subdomainYesSubdomain name (e.g. 'demo')
root_levelNoNo longer supported — TXT records are always written at the root domain. Passing true returns an error.
host_prefixYesTXT record host prefix (e.g. '_vercel' for Vercel verification)
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. 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"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses the auth requirement (Authorization: Bearer styo_…), the exact failure response (ACCOUNT_REQUIRED), and that the value is merged alongside other owners' values at the root rather than replacing them. Gaps remain around create-vs-update semantics (what happens if the record already exists) and any rate limiting.

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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the auth constraint is stated before the failure code. The middle sentence is dense and slightly circuitous about how the hostname is formed, but no sentence is filler.

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 6-param, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, auth, error behavior, and placement semantics. It omits what the call returns (the minted owner_token is only mentioned in the schema) and how an update interacts with an existing record, which an agent would want before calling.

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 baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it shows the composed record name (_vercel.sitey.my) that host_prefix produces and confirms TXT records are always written at the root domain. That composition insight is not derivable from the individual schema descriptions alone.

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+resource ('Create or update a TXT record') and a concrete purpose (domain verification), which separates it from the delete_txt_record and listing siblings. The Vercel/Netlify example grounds the purpose in a real scenario.

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?

Clearly tells the agent when this applies (DNS-based ownership proof for services like Vercel/Netlify) and states the account prerequisite plus the ACCOUNT_REQUIRED failure mode. It does not, however, explicitly name the alternative tool for removal or the case when a record already exists, leaving that to inference.

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