extract_content
Extract a page's main content as clean Markdown + text with metadata. (content; $0.005/call in USDC via x402, 30 free/day).
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Target URL or hostname. | |
| mode | No |
fetcher
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses pricing and free tier cap, but lacks detail on behavioral traits like handling dynamic content, authentication requirements, or rate limits. With no annotations, more depth is expected.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness4/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Very concise: one sentence plus a pricing note. No unnecessary words, but could pack more useful information without adding length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Lacks explanation of return format (metadata fields), and with no output schema, agents may need to call and infer. However, for a simple extract tool with good sibling context, it meets minimum adequacy.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 50% (only url has description). The description mentions output format ('clean Markdown + text') but doesn't clarify what each mode (markdown, text, full) produces, leaving agents to infer.
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?
Clearly states the tool extracts a page's main content as clean Markdown and text with metadata, distinguishing it from siblings like extract_pdf and render_page.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like extract_pdf (for PDFs) or render_page (for full page renders). Mentions pricing but not usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Try in Browser
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there are overlapping pairs: unfurl_url/get_oembed/find_favicon all provide URL metadata, and render_page/screenshot_page both render a page (render_page can also screenshot). Descriptions help disambiguate, so only minor confusion is likely.
Naming Consistency3/5
Tool names mix verb_noun patterns (check_domain, extract_content) with noun_verb patterns (dns_lookup, ssl_lookup, whois_lookup). Additionally, guard_inspect and guard_tx deviate from the typical verb-first style. The naming is readable but not consistent.
Tool Count3/5
With 19 tools, the server is at the heavier end of the scale. While it covers a broad web-intel toolkit, several tools feel out of place for a 'fetcher' (e.g., generate_qr, guard_tx, guard_inspect), making the set feel bloated and unfocused.
Completeness4/5
The core web-fetching and analysis surface is well covered: DNS, WHOIS, SSL, headers, content extraction, rendering, screenshots, feeds, embeds, redirects, and robots. Missing is a simple raw HTML fetcher, but extract_content and render_page likely cover most needs. The addition of security and utility tools doesn't fill obvious gaps.