Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designers

by com.allthepossibles
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Site inventory

site_inventory
Read-only

Pro. Map a site into page types. Crawls the site from url (same origin only, up to 40 pages, 4 requests at a time, or only the paths you list), uses sitemap.xml to find pages, and obeys robots.txt for the user agent ATPDesigners. Reads static HTML only. The result opens with coverage: pages read of pages found, which were skipped or truncated, and requests used. Returns page-type groups (by URL pattern and template markers) with counts found and read, depth, orphan hints from sitemap and link comparison, and a pages.md style table with one verified URL per type that other audits can take as input.

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "site_inventory"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesHome page or any page on the site. The crawl stays on this origin.
pathsNoOptional list of same-origin paths such as /about. When given, only these pages are read and links are not followed.
sitemapNoUse sitemap.xml to find pages. Default true.
maxPagesNoOptional lower page cap. The hard cap is 40 pages.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, open-world and non-destructive traits, and the description adds substantive behaviour beyond them: crawl breadth limits, concurrency (4 requests), robots.txt user agent ATPDesigners, static-HTML-only constraint, truncation/skip handling, and coverage reporting. This is exactly the extra context the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in a short lead clause, then the crawl rules and output shape follow in logical order. The single long paragraph is dense but each clause carries real information; light trimming of redundant cap mentions would make it tighter.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly: coverage header (pages read/found, skips, truncation, requests used), page-type groups with counts/depth, orphan hints, and the pages.md table. An agent knows what it will receive and what it can feed downstream.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter is already described, including that `paths` disables link following and that `maxPages` sits under a hard cap of 40. The description restates the same constraints rather than adding syntax or edge-case detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Map a site into page types') and immediately scopes it to crawling from `url` with page/type grouping. It is clearly distinguishable from nearby siblings such as site_heading_outline, site_meta_audit and sitemap_to_outline, which audit single facets rather than producing a page-type inventory.

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 strong operating context (same-origin crawl, 40-page cap, sitemap and robots.txt behaviour, static HTML only) and hints at its upstream role by noting the output gives 'one verified URL per type that other audits can take as input'. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling audits to run instead or when not to use this tool.

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

All Designers toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources