Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designers

by com.allthepossibles
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Page diff

site_page_diff
Read-only

Pro. Fetch two public pages (url and compareUrl, which must differ; use it for staging against production) and return a structural diff: metadata, landmarks, headings, links, images, stylesheets and scripts (same-host links compared by path), text length, and the change in static accessibility findings. Obeys robots.txt for the user agent ATPDesigners and opens with coverage.

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>",
      "compareUrl": "<compareUrl>"
    },
    "name": "site_page_diff"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFirst page (for example production)
compareUrlYesSecond page (for example staging). Must differ from url.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive and open-world behavior, and the description adds real operational context on top: robots.txt is obeyed under the user agent ATPDesigners, same-host links are compared by path, and results 'open with coverage.' The mysterious 'opens with coverage' phrasing is the only weak spot in an otherwise informative disclosure.

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?

Two dense sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the diff contents enumerated compactly. Minor waste from the unexplained 'Pro.' prefix and the trailing 'opens with coverage' clause, which adds ambiguity rather than clarity.

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?

With no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back, and it does so thoroughly by listing every diff category. It stops short of explaining result ordering or handling of large pages, leaving a small gap.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema, including the differ constraint. The description adds little beyond that — the staging-vs-production framing duplicates the schema examples — so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource (fetches two pages, returns a structural diff) and enumerates exactly what is compared: metadata, landmarks, headings, links, images, stylesheets, scripts, text length, accessibility findings. An agent can differentiate it from siblings like site_consistency or check_design_drift purely from the text.

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?

Includes an explicit use case — 'use it for staging against production' — which tells the agent when this tool is the right pick. It does not name an alternative or a when-not condition, so it falls short of the top score.

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