Skip to main content
Glama

PreClick — An MCP-native URL preflight scanning service for autonomous agents.

by ai.preclick

url_scanner_scan

Read-only

Analyze a URL for security threats (synchronous, blocks until complete or timeout). Returns risk score, confidence, agent access guidance, and intent_alignment (always not_provided for this tool; use url_scanner_scan_with_intent for intent context). For long-running scans, prefer url_scanner_async_scan which returns immediately with a task_id for polling via url_scanner_async_task_result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe URL to analyze. Must be HTTP or HTTPS. If no scheme provided, https:// is assumed.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, destructiveHint), the description adds valuable behavioral context: synchronous blocking behavior, return data (risk score, confidence, agent access guidance), and the caveat that intent_alignment is always 'not_provided'. It does not contradict annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence provides necessary information—the blocking behavior, return fields, and alternative tools—with no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter synchronous tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, return fields, and alternative tools. Annotations cover safety profile, so no critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 schema description fully covers the single 'url' parameter, including format requirements and default scheme handling. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 tool analyzes a URL for security threats, with an explicit note that it is synchronous and blocks until completion. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning url_scanner_async_scan and url_scanner_scan_with_intent, making the specific resource and scope unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use alternatives: prefer url_scanner_async_scan for long-running scans, and use url_scanner_scan_with_intent when intent context is needed. This directly addresses when not 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.

All PreClick — An MCP-native URL preflight scanning service for autonomous agents. 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: sync vs async scan, with/without intent, and task status vs result retrieval. The descriptions explicitly clarify when to use each, leaving no ambiguity about which tool to select.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names follow a predictable url_scanner_ prefix pattern with consistent suffixes for intent ('_with_intent') and sync/async distinction. The minor inconsistency is mixing 'async_scan' for submission with 'async_task_status'/'async_task_result' for polling, but the pattern remains readable and understandable.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a URL scanning service: it covers the sync/async dimension, intent context, and the full task lifecycle (submit, check status, get result). No redundant or missing categories for the core purpose.

Completeness4/5

The core scan lifecycle is fully covered (sync and async, with intent, status polling, result retrieval). The only notable gap is the lack of a cancel operation for async tasks, which could be useful for long-running scans, but this is a minor omission not likely to cause agent failures.

Resources