tslink

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Preview an app recipe

recipe_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Preview an app-specific recipe with overrides before applying it to review requested and effective service configurations, create-or-skip action, owner advice, and safety warnings without writes.

Instructions

Preview one app-specific recipe with the supplied overrides; return requested and effective service configurations, a create-or-skip action, owner configuration advice and safety warnings. Use recipe_plan before recipe_apply to review without writes; template_plan previews a fixed multi-service stack instead. Does not probe the app or prove its authentication.

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": {
      "recipe_id": "<recipe_id>"
    },
    "name": "recipe_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional service name override.
`tags`	No	Comma-separated tags.
`allow`	No	Comma-separated private HTTP identities.
`funnel`	No	PUBLIC INTERNET exposure: review app authentication with the owner first.
`health`	No
`target`	No	Optional loopback HTTP(S) target override; use the host port.
`ephemeral`	No
`recipe_id`	Yes	Recipe ID from recipe_list.
`funnel_ttl`	No	Relative lifetime (descending unique units w,d,h,m,s,ms,us,ns) or until <RFC3339\|YYYY-MM-DD\|YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM>. Local unless offset given; DST gaps/folds require an offset. Minimum 1h. Presets: 1h, 8h, 24h, 3d, 7d. Default 24h; guest/public maximum defaults to 7d, configurable in durations.public_max. Never refused. Omission on add preserves an existing deadline.
`public_ack`	No	Required acknowledgement when funnel is true.
`control_url`	No
`preserve_host`	No	Override the recipe Host forwarding default; omitted uses recipe.preserve_host. False explicitly restores upstream Host rewriting.
`request_limits`	No
`no_auto_provision`	No
`no_daemon_install`	No
`force_unsafe_public`	No	DANGER: overrides never-public recipe policy, potentially exposing host control, code execution or secrets to everyone. Requires funnel and public_ack.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`next`	Yes
`action`	Yes
`recipe`	Yes
`applied`	Yes
`dry_run`	Yes
`service`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`requested`	Yes
`schema_version`	Yes
`catalog_version`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value by disclosing the return payload shape and the negative capability that it does not probe the app or prove authentication. It stops short of noting that the preview is purely advisory and that overriding fields like force_unsafe_public are honored only later at apply time.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose and payload first, routing/second-opinion second, boundary third. No restatement of the title or filler, and each sentence carries distinct information.

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 16-parameter preview tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, sequencing, alternative, and negative capability, which is enough to call it correctly. It is slightly thin on how overrides interact with recipe defaults, but the output schema carries the return contract.

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 only parameter-related statement is 'with the supplied overrides,' which does not explain any of the 16 parameters. With schema description coverage at 63% and several params (ephemeral, control_url, no_auto_provision, no_daemon_install) carrying no schema description at all, the description does not compensate for the gap, but the well-documented majority keeps this at baseline.

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 (Preview) and resource (one app-specific recipe), then enumerates the returned artifacts: requested/effective service configurations, create-or-skip action, owner advice, safety warnings. It explicitly distinguishes itself from both recipe_apply and template_plan, so an agent can pick it without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

'Use recipe_plan before recipe_apply to review without writes' gives the sequencing rule, and 'template_plan previews a fixed multi-service stack instead' names the alternative with the condition that selects it. The closing negative ('Does not probe the app or prove its authentication') tells the agent what this tool will not substitute for.

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