Layero

This connector has been deprecated

Duplicate listing of the same server under an old namespace. The maintained listing is Layero (ru.layero/layero): same endpoint https://mcp.layero.ru/mcp, current description and tools. The landing-page generator described here was removed in MCP 2.0.

Data API базы: сайты

data_api_origins

Destructive

Sites allowed to call the database from a browser: list, add, remove.

Addresses of the connected projects and their branches are allowed
automatically — do not add them. An added site opens no data by itself:
what can be read and written is decided by access levels. Adding and
removing need the person's consent; a removed site is refused on every
request. Needs a token with the admin scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	For add and remove: the site origin with scheme, `https://shop.example`.
`note`	No	For add: why the site was added.
`action`	No	`list` — addresses of the database's projects and the manually added ones; `add` — allow a site; `remove` — remove a site.	list
`database`	No	The database: name, slug or id. Without it — the organization's only database with the Data API enabled.
`confirmed`	No	true — the person has already agreed in the chat after seeing what will change. A client with forms does not need it: the server asks the person itself. Never set it without the person's explicit consent.
`organization`	No	Organization slug. Without it — the only one, or the personal one.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sites`	No
`action`	Yes
`changed`	No
`database`	Yes
`next_action`	Yes
`organization`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedSep 18, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"`list` — адреса проектов базы и добавленные вручную; `add` — пустить сайт; `remove` — убрать сайт."New value: +"`list` — addresses of the database's projects and the manually added ones; `add` — allow a site; `remove` — remove a site."

changedInput schema / properties / confirmed / description

Previous value: -"true — человек уже согласился в чате, увидев, что поменяется. Клиенту с формами не нужен: он спросит сам. Без явного согласия человека не ставь."New value: +"true — the person has already agreed in the chat after seeing what will change. A client with forms does not need it: the server asks the person itself. Never set it without the person's explicit consent."

changedInput schema / properties / database / description

Previous value: -"База: имя, слаг или id. Без него — единственная база организации с включённым Data API."New value: +"The database: name, slug or id. Without it — the organization's only database with the Data API enabled."

changedInput schema / properties / note / description

Previous value: -"Для add: зачем сайт добавлен."New value: +"For add: why the site was added."

changedInput schema / properties / organization / description

Previous value: -"Организация (слаг). Без него — единственная или личная."New value: +"Organization slug. Without it — the only one, or the personal one."

changedInput schema / properties / url / description

Previous value: -"Для add и remove: адрес сайта со схемой, `https://shop.example`."New value: +"For add and remove: the site origin with scheme, `https://shop.example`."

AddedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context: a removed site is refused on every request, adding a site opens no data by itself (access levels decide), and consent is required. This goes beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then practical constraints. No fluff; every sentence adds necessary context.

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?

Given the 6-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential behavior: actions, consent, automatic addresses, and token scope. It could mention error handling but that's not required. It is complete enough for an agent to call correctly.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for every parameter, including the 'confirmed' consent warning. The description adds a high-level caution about not adding automatic addresses but does not substantially expand on individual parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the resource (sites allowed to call the database from a browser) and the actions (list, add, remove). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on origin management, and the specific resource is unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly warns against adding automatically allowed project addresses and mentions the consent requirement for add/remove. It also states the admin token requirement. It doesn't name alternatives but the resource is specific enough to infer when to use it.

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

All Layero 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?