Skip to main content
Glama
nks-hub

rybbit-mcp

by nks-hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create Site

rybbit_create_site

Create a new website or mobile app site in Rybbit to obtain a siteId for tracking integration.

Instructions

Create a new site in Rybbit. Use type 'web' for websites (domain like 'example.com') or type 'mobile' for mobile apps (package name like 'com.example.app'). 'app' is accepted as a legacy alias for 'mobile'. Returns the created site with its siteId for tracking integration.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoDisplay name for the site (defaults to domain)
typeNoSite type: 'web' for websites (default), 'mobile' for mobile apps. 'app' is a legacy alias mapped to 'mobile'.
domainYesDomain of the site (e.g. 'example.com') or package name for mobile apps (e.g. 'com.example.app')
organizationIdYesOrganization ID to add the site to. Use rybbit_list_sites to find organization IDs.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
domainNo
siteIdNo
messageNo
organizationIdNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.8.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -"Domain of the site (e.g. 'example.com') or package name for apps (e.g. 'com.example.app')"New value: +"Domain of the site (e.g. 'example.com') or package name for mobile apps (e.g. 'com.example.app')"
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / description
      Previous value: -"Site type: 'web' for websites (default), 'app' for mobile apps"New value: +"Site type: 'web' for websites (default), 'mobile' for mobile apps. 'app' is a legacy alias mapped to 'mobile'."
    • changedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "web",
-  "app"
-]New value: +[
+  "web",
+  "mobile",
+  "app"
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "organizationId": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "number"
+      ]
+    },
+    "siteId": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "number"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.5.2

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds a return-value note, but with an output schema present that is largely redundant, and it omits what an agent would want to know about duplicate domains or failure behavior for a non-idempotent create.

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, front-loaded with the action, then the type semantics, then the return value. No filler and nothing misplaced.

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?

With annotations, a full-coverage schema and an output schema, the description covers everything the agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. Minor gaps remain around organizational prerequisites and duplicate-handling behavior for a non-idempotent create.

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%, including enum semantics for 'type' and the organizationId lookup hint, so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description restates the web/mobile/app type mapping rather than adding anything new, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Create a new site in Rybbit') and immediately clarifies the resource's two variants. The operation is inherently distinct from siblings like delete_site, update_site_config and list_sites, but the description never explicitly differentiates itself from them.

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?

It gives useful guidance on how to choose the 'type' value (web for domains, mobile for package names), which is real usage help, but says nothing about when to create a site versus reusing an existing one or which organizational prerequisites apply. Usage is largely implied by the verb.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools