Extract structured table rows and columns from supplied HTML, DOCX, or CSV documents.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| filename | Yes | ||
| content_base64 | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | Structured Table extraction result | |
| meta | Yes | ||
| service | Yes | ||
| version | Yes | ||
| request_id | Yes | Unique request identifier |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / checkout_pathAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^/try/",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / executes_automaticallyAdded value: +{
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / handoff_pathAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Free full contract and spend-capped command handoff; reading it does not execute or purchase the follow-up.",
+ "pattern": "^/catalog/",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / handoff_payment_requiredAdded value: +{
+ "const": false,
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / maximum_atomic_usdcAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^[1-9][0-9]*$",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / properties / sample_pathAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^/samples/",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+}Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actions / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "service",
- "title",
- "reason",
- "method",
- "path",
- "price",
- "input_template",
- "use_output",
- "authorization_required"
-]New value: +[
+ "service",
+ "title",
+ "reason",
+ "method",
+ "path",
+ "price",
+ "input_template",
+ "use_output",
+ "handoff_path",
+ "checkout_path",
+ "sample_path",
+ "maximum_atomic_usdc",
+ "handoff_payment_required",
+ "executes_automatically",
+ "authorization_required"
+]Output schema / properties / data / properties / rows / itemsAdded value: +{}Output schema / properties / data / properties / rows / typePrevious value: -"integer"New value: +"array"Output schema / properties / data / properties / warning / typePrevious value: -"string"New value: +[
+ "string",
+ "null"
+]Output schema / properties / meta / properties / next_actionsAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Optional separately priced follow-up calls. Each action requires a new payment challenge and explicit buyer authorization.",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "authorization_required": {
+ "const": true,
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "input_template": {
+ "description": "Client-side template only: $request refers to the original input, $result to this response, and $json(...) serializes its argument. The server does not execute the follow-up.",
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "method": {
+ "const": "POST",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "path": {
+ "pattern": "^/v1/",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "price": {
+ "pattern": "^\\$[0-9]+",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "reason": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "service": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "title": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "use_output": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "service",
+ "title",
+ "reason",
+ "method",
+ "path",
+ "price",
+ "input_template",
+ "use_output",
+ "authorization_required"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Output schema / properties / meta / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "duration_ms",
- "cached",
- "sources",
- "warnings"
-]New value: +[
+ "duration_ms",
+ "cached",
+ "sources",
+ "warnings",
+ "next_actions"
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to cover safety. It adds the format support but nothing about error handling, size constraints (though schema has maxLength), or what happens with malformed documents. This is borderline but acceptable given the annotations and output schema.
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 is a single sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the main action and includes only necessary qualifiers (formats).
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?
The tool is straightforward: take a document, extract tables. An output schema exists, so return values are defined elsewhere. The description misses parameter semantics but otherwise provides a complete picture for a simple extraction tool.
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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it doesn't mention the filename or content_base64 parameters at all. It only says 'supplied documents,' which is vague and doesn't explain how the document is passed or the relationship between the two required parameters.
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 uses a specific verb ('Extract') and resource ('structured table rows and columns') and clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like document.diff, document.extract, and document.redact by specifying the exact output (tables) and input formats (HTML, DOCX, CSV).
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 implicitly tells when to use the tool: when you have HTML, DOCX, or CSV documents and need structured tables. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or name them, but the context is clear enough for most agents.
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.
Tools are grouped into clear domain prefixes (crypto, data, developer, document, research, web) and each tool name describes a specific function; however, a few umbrella tools like web.full-audit and data.contract overlap with their more targeted counterparts, creating minor ambiguity.
All tool names follow a consistent pattern: a domain prefix, a dot, and a hyphenated lowercase compound name (e.g., crypto.base-block-inspect, web.seo-audit). This makes naming predictable and easy to scan.
At 63 tools, the surface area is very large and exceeds the 50+ threshold for extreme mismatch. While the tools are organized into six domains, the sheer number makes it difficult for an agent to select efficiently, and some tools are bundled combinations of others.
Each domain offers a thorough set of operations: crypto covers address, account, block, contract, events, gas, and transaction inspection; data covers cleaning, conversion, schema, and validation; developer covers code review, dependency/license audits, and test generation; research covers SEC, OFAC, GLEIF, and USAspending; web covers extraction, SEO, security, and performance. No obvious dead ends exist for the read-only/inspection purpose.