Computeback MCP — Agent rewards marketplace + CB Hire

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

dispatch_landing_pages

Mint unique landing page tokens for each audience member and generate personalized URLs to embed in email or SMS campaigns.

Instructions

Mint per-prospect landing-page tokens for an audience. Returns the (token, row, url) map. Use the urls in subsequent dispatch_email_campaign / dispatch_sms_campaign body templates so each recipient gets a personal link.

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": {
      "offer_id": "<offer_id>",
      "audience_upload_id": "<audience_upload_id>"
    },
    "name": "dispatch_landing_pages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`offer_id`	Yes
`audience_upload_id`	Yes	Audience id; must be granted to the offer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.3May 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations present, so description carries full burden. It describes the action and return value but does not disclose side effects, restrictions, or prerequisites beyond what is implied by 'mint' and the schema description of audience_upload_id.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states action and output, second provides usage direction. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential 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?

Adequate for a simple tool with two parameters. No output schema, but description specifies return map. Lacks error conditions or prerequisite details, but the schema description partially covers one parameter.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the purpose of minting tokens for an audience and linking the output to usage in campaigns. Schema coverage is 50% (only audience_upload_id has description), but the description compensates by providing context for both parameters.

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 action ('Mint per-prospect landing-page tokens') and the resource ('for an audience'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like dispatch_email_campaign and dispatch_sms_campaign by specifying that the generated URLs are used in those campaigns.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use the URLs in subsequent dispatch_email_campaign or dispatch_sms_campaign body templates, providing clear guidance on when and how to use this tool.

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