Skip to main content
Glama

Valet

by io.github.valetdotdev

Rename a website

rename_site
Destructive

Rename a website and move it to https://.valet.run/. The old address stops serving the site and its name becomes available to another site or app in the same organization. Requires connecting a Valet account.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesRequired. The site's current name.
new_nameYesRequired. The site's new name. It also becomes the last path segment of the new URL.
org_nameNoThe Valet organization the site belongs to. Omit to use the organization the account joined first.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / new_name / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The site's new name. It also becomes the first label of the new URL."New value: +"Required. The site's new name. It also becomes the last path segment of the new URL."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"The site's current name."New value: +"Required. The site's current name."
    • changedInput schema / properties / new_name / description
      Previous value: -"The site's new name. It also becomes the first label of the new URL."New value: +"Required. The site's new name. It also becomes the first label of the new URL."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining concrete consequences: the old address stops serving the site, the old name becomes available to other sites or apps, and a Valet account connection is required. This is useful behavioral detail.

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?

The description is three concise sentences with no filler. The main action and URL effect are front-loaded, followed by important behavioral consequences and a prerequisite. Every sentence adds information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with three parameters, full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what happens, what becomes unavailable, and what is required before calling. Nothing essential is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema, though it does reinforce that new_name becomes the last path segment and implies the site moves to a new URL.

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 states a specific verb ('rename') and resource ('website') while adding the concrete effect: moving the site to a new URL. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like delete_site, publish_site, and get_site.

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?

The description gives clear context about when this tool is appropriate: when a site should be renamed and its URL changed. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the behavior is specific enough to imply the intended use.

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

All Valet toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action. The three list_* connector tools are clearly separated by scope (catalog vs attachable vs attached), and the site management tools are unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a uniform verb_noun snake_case pattern. Each name directly states the action and object, with no mixed conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count4/5

16 tools is slightly above the typical well-scoped range, but the set covers two clear domains—site publishing and connector management—and each tool has a distinct role. The count is justified, if a bit heavy.

Completeness4/5

Site lifecycle is well covered: publish, list, get, rename, delete, access, and share. The connector lifecycle covers create, attach, detach, and call, but lacks delete/update connector operations, which are a minor gap.

Resources