Fetch any URL through the SSRF-hardened CORS proxy and return its response headers + status. Keyless trial of the CORS Proxy & Web Toolbox API.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The URL to fetch through the proxy. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
While the description states 'SSRF-hardened CORS proxy' and 'Keyless trial', it does not disclose important behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication requirements for full access, or whether the full response body is returned.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description consists of two concise sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and result.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains purpose and outcome. However, it could specify the return format (e.g., JSON structure) to be fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single parameter 'url' is well-described in the schema, and the description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'Fetch', the resource 'any URL', and the output 'response headers + status'. It differentiates from sibling tools like url_metadata by specifying raw response headers.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions 'Keyless trial', implying a trial version, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like url_metadata or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct functionality (fetching URLs, converting currency, validating email, geolocating IPs, listing APIs, matching NAICS codes, fetching URL metadata), with no overlap in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, e.g., currency_convert, ip_lookup, naics_match, ensuring predictability.
Seven tools is well-scoped for an API catalog service providing trial endpoints for a variety of utilities—neither too sparse nor overloaded.
The set covers key read-only operations for each featured API, though missing write or list operations (e.g., listing supported currencies) are minor gaps that users can work around.
