ship.page

Claim an anonymous drop

claim_drop

Destructive

Attach an anonymously deployed drop to the authenticated account using its one-time claim token (spc_..., returned once by deploy_html/deploy_files). Claiming extends the drop to the free-account lifetime (90 days) and can revive an offline drop during its 30-day private recovery window. Claimed drops become listable, deletable, and — on paid plans — redeployable via named drops. Requires an sp_ API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes	The drop slug (the subdomain part of its ${domain} URL).
`claim_token`	Yes	The one-time spc_... token returned at deploy time.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes
`slug`	Yes
`claimed`	Yes
`restored`	No	True when the drop had already expired and was revived by the claim
`expires_at`	No	ISO timestamp after the claim's lifetime extension, or null

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 10, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"The drop slug (the subdomain part of its shipped.run URL)."New value: +"The drop slug (the subdomain part of its ${domain} URL)."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 31, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Previous value: -"The drop slug (the subdomain part of its shipped.page URL)."New value: +"The drop slug (the subdomain part of its shipped.run URL)."

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 21, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / expires_at

Added value: +{
+  "description": "ISO timestamp after the claim's lifetime extension, or null",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / restored

Added value: +{
+  "description": "True when the drop had already expired and was revived by the claim",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

AddedAug 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal a mutating, non-idempotent, destructive operation, and the description adds meaningful context: the token is one-time, claiming extends the drop lifetime, can revive an offline drop during its recovery window, and grants new capabilities. It also notes the sp_ API key requirement, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences pack the core action, lifecycle consequences, and auth requirement without wasted words. The key action and token mechanism are front-loaded, and the later sentences add useful context without bloating the description.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the purpose, the token source, the effects of claiming, and the required API key. It does not detail error cases or explicitly warn about irreversibility, but the one-time token wording and the lifecycle information make the tool's behavior sufficiently clear for correct invocation.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, and both slug and claim_token are clearly described in the schema. The description reiterates the spc_... token format but adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Attach') and a specific resource ('anonymously deployed drop') with a precise mechanism (one-time claim token), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing deploy_html/deploy_files as the source of the token and noting claimed drops become listable/deletable/redeployable, which separates it from delete_drop and restore_drop.

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?

The description gives clear context for when to use this tool: when claiming an anonymously deployed drop with its one-time token, including lifecycle effects like extending lifetime to 90 days and reviving offline drops. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the unique claim-token mechanism makes the intended use unambiguous.

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

All ship.page 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?