Skip to main content
Glama

ActableSite AI Crawler Monitor

by com.actablesite

Check AI crawler robots.txt policy

check_ai_crawler_policy
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check the homepage robots.txt rule for eight named OpenAI, Anthropic, Perplexity, and Google AI crawler tokens. The free result stays complete and includes a bounded optional handoff to exact monitoring terms. Results describe robots policy only and do not prove network access, authentic bot identity, crawling, indexing, citation, or ranking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic HTTP or HTTPS website URL. Private and local-network targets are rejected.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds significant context by clarifying limitations (does not prove crawling, indexing, etc.) and the handoff capability, exceeding what annotations provide.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. First sentence states the action, second sets expectations. Every sentence is valuable.

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?

Given the simple input (one parameter) and rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description is complete, covering purpose, limitations, and optional handoff. No output schema needed.

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 single parameter is described in the schema with clear constraints (public URLs only, private rejected). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond implying the URL should be the homepage, but schema coverage is high.

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 checks homepage robots.txt rules for eight named AI crawler tokens. It distinguishes from siblings like audit_public_website by focusing specifically on robots.txt policies for AI crawlers.

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?

The description sets expectations by stating what the tool does not prove (network access, authentic bot identity, etc.) and mentions a bounded optional handoff to monitoring terms. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for specific use cases.

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

All ActableSite AI Crawler Monitor 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The first two tools (audit_public_website, check_ai_crawler_policy) are clearly distinct active scanning tools. The three 'get_*_offer' tools all return pricing information but for different products (crawler watch, full report, practice radar), making them distinguishable by product name.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: 'audit_public_website', 'check_ai_crawler_policy', and three 'get_*_offer' tools. The verbs 'audit', 'check', and 'get' clearly indicate the action, and the nouns precisely describe the target.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: two core monitoring actions (audit and policy check) and three informational offer tools for different products. This covers the essential functionality without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness3/5

The server covers scanning and policy checking but lacks tools to actually purchase or activate monitoring services after showing offers. Users must leave the MCP to complete transactions, creating a dead-end for the offer flows.

Resources