Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

pageaudit

by online.pageaudit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set domain expiry

set_domain_expiry
Destructive

Requires the account session, current X-Organization-Id and CSRF for writes. Set or remove the private manual expiry. It does not change the registry data or confirm renewal payment. Send manual_expires_on, dns, or both. Omitted settings are preserved. DNS requires both selectors and rotating_addresses. A manual date does not change registry data or confirm renewal payment. An identical retry is idempotent. A conflicting revision returns 409.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "revision": "<revision>",
      "manual_expires_on": "<manual_expires_on>"
    },
    "name": "set_domain_expiry"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesOwned tab ID from list_tabs.
revisionYesCurrent revision from the corresponding settings or monitor. Use zero for the first change.
manual_expires_onYesYYYY-MM-DD, or null to remove.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The description adds real behavioral context beyond the annotations: auth/CSRF requirements, optimistic concurrency (stale revision returns 409), and that registry data and renewal payment are untouched. But it explicitly claims 'An identical retry is idempotent' while the annotations declare idempotentHint=false, giving an agent conflicting guidance on retry safety. It also never explains what is actually lost when the expiry is removed, despite destructiveHint=true.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Auth and concurrency facts are front-loaded well, but the sentence 'It does not change the registry data or confirm renewal payment' is repeated almost verbatim later ('A manual date does not change registry data or confirm renewal payment'). The off-schema `dns`/`selectors`/`rotating_addresses` material is dead weight for this tool.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 3-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the important operational facts: prerequisites, merge semantics, concurrency conflict, and non-effects on registry data. It is undermined by references to parameters that do not exist and by not clarifying what removal of the manual expiry implies (fallback to registry behaviour), which matters given destructiveHint=true.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema alone already documents id, revision, and manual_expires_on (including 'YYYY-MM-DD, or null to remove'), making the baseline 3. The description instead introduces `dns`, `selectors`, and `rotating_addresses`, none of which exist as parameters here, which actively misleads rather than adding meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Set or remove the private manual expiry.' The word 'private' and 'manual' distinguish it from registry-level renewal operations in the sibling list (configure_domain_monitor, configure_domain_dns, domain_status). It stops short of naming a sibling alternative, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Prerequisites are spelled out (account session, current X-Organization-Id, CSRF for writes) and merge behavior is described ('Omitted settings are preserved'). However, the combination guidance ('Send manual_expires_on, dns, or both') references a `dns` option that does not exist in this tool's schema, and no alternative tool is named for DNS configuration. Usage is implied rather than cleanly routed.

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

All pageaudit toolsInspect
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