Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Preferly

by ai.preferly
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check readable business info

check_business_info
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks whether AI tools can read a business's details from its website. It reports whether the business name, phone number, email, address, opening hours and prices are readable as text in the page, only appear after scripts run, or weren't found, on the homepage and up to 2 contact, booking or pricing pages that robots.txt allows. Input: one public website. Reads robots.txt, the homepage, /llms.txt and up to 2 more pages as PreferlyBot; changes nothing.

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": {
      "website": "<website>"
    },
    "name": "check_business_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
websiteYesThe public website to check, like example.com or https://www.example.com. One site per call.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavior: it reads robots.txt, the homepage, /llms.txt and up to two more pages, does so as the PreferlyBot user agent, respects robots.txt, and changes nothing. It omits latency and rate-limit expectations, but the crawl scope and identity are disclosed.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the trigger, then the returned signals, then the crawl scope. Nothing is padding, though 'Input: one public website' mildly duplicates the schema.

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 no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the three result states (readable as text, only after scripts run, not found) and the pages checked, which is what an agent needs to interpret results. It does not describe response shape or error behavior for invalid/unreachable sites, a minor gap for an open-world network tool.

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?

There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains the website argument. The description only restates the constraint ('Input: one public website', implicitly one site per call), adding no format or normalization detail beyond the schema.

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: it reports whether a business's name, phone, email, address, hours and prices are readable as text on a site. That is concrete enough to distinguish it from siblings like check_llms_txt or check_ai_crawler_access, though it never names or contrasts those alternatives.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger: use when the user asks whether AI tools can read a business's details from its website. It gives no when-not guidance and does not point to sibling tools for adjacent questions (schema markup, llms.txt, crawler access), so selection is clear but not fully routed.

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

All Preferly toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources