Ginta

Look at a site (screenshots)

preview_site

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use after create_site or a bigger change to see the page like a visitor: desktop (1280 px, top to bottom) and phone (390 px) screenshots of one page. Limited per day by plan; if none are left, review the HTML instead.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	Page to look at, e.g. "menu" (default: the home page).
`site_id`	Yes	The site id: the first part of the site URL, e.g. "bella-roma" for https://bella-roma.ginta.page (see list_sites).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	The page that was looked at.
`text`	Yes	The answer in words, the same as the text content: read it (for get_guide the whole guide, for get_site the files' contents).
`errors`	No	Problems the browser reported.
`version`	No	The live version.
`available`	Yes	false = no screenshots right now; review the HTML instead.
`phone_images`	No	Phone screenshots (images in the content).
`desktop_images`	No	Desktop screenshots (images in the content).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 4, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / text

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The answer in words, the same as the text content: read it (for get_guide the whole guide, for get_site the files' contents).",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "url",
-  "available"
-]New value: +[
+  "url",
+  "available",
+  "text"
+]

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new operational context: a per-plan daily quota and what to do when it is exhausted. It does not say what the screen dimensions mean for output shape or how failures (page not found, site unpublished) surface, but with output schema present that is a minor gap.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the usage trigger, then capability, then the quota constraint and fallback. No filler and nothing repeated from the title or 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?

For a two-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers purpose, timing, quota and fallback. The one omission is naming the tool to fall back to when the daily screenshots are used up.

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% and both parameters carry examples ('menu', 'bella-roma'). The description adds only that exactly one page is captured, which does not materially extend the meaning of site_id or page beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it produces desktop (1280 px, full-page) and phone (390 px) screenshots of one page 'like a visitor' would see it. That is concrete enough to separate it from read-oriented siblings like get_site or get_stats, which return data rather than visuals.

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?

Gives a clear triggering context ('after create_site or a bigger change') and a fallback when quota is exhausted ('review the HTML instead'). The only gap is that the fallback does not name the sibling tool to use for reviewing HTML, leaving the agent to guess among get_site/manage_site.

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

All Ginta tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?