set_visit_linkSet the HTTPS link viewers see on the broadcast picture and ended card, or pass an empty URL to clear it. Requires an open booth.
Sets the https link every viewer sees on the picture and on the ended card (Visit). Pass an empty url to clear it. Needs the open booth.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | An https URL, or empty to clear. | |
| meeting_id | Yes | The meeting_id of the room (from create_broadcast or join_broadcast). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the meaningful traits: the link is public ("every viewer sees"), where it is rendered, and that empty clears it. It omits permissions/roles required and whether the prior link is overwritten, which keeps it short of a 5.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three short sentences, zero filler, with the effect stated first and the precondition last. Every sentence contributes a distinct fact.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a two-parameter mutation with fully described schema and no output schema, the description supplies the effect, the clearing behavior, and the prerequisite. A note on required role/open-booth failure behavior would close the remaining gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented in-schema, including the https constraint and the empty-to-clear convention. The description restates the clear semantics but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Names a specific verb and resource (set the Visit link) and describes exactly where the value surfaces — on the picture and the ended card — which lets an agent tell it apart from the surrounding booth/broadcast tools. No explicit sibling contrast, but the operation is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
"Pass an empty url to clear it" gives the clearing recipe, and "Needs the open booth" states a concrete precondition for invocation. Clear usage context, though it never names an alternative tool or says what to do if the booth is closed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.