Nimo

Check a Website

check_website

Start a free speed check of one public webpage. Returns jobId and private accessToken; use get_check to read it. Uses one free check. No account needed. Do not repeat to poll.

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": "check_website"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Public page address, such as https://example.com/products/shoes.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	Checked page URL; present when a result is available.
`error`	No	Public failure message when the job failed.
`jobId`	Yes	Private check identifier. Pair with accessToken when polling.
`device`	No	Lab device, when recorded for the completed job.
`report`	No	Measured report summary, present only when a result is available.
`status`	Yes
`saveUrl`	Yes	Private save link carrying the check handle in its URL fragment.
`nextStep`	Yes
`retention`	Yes
`measuredAt`	No	Measurement timestamp, when recorded for the completed job.
`accessToken`	Yes	Bearer secret for this check only. Keep private; never log or publish.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 14, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / report / properties / pageMetadata

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "issueCount": {
+          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+          "minimum": 0,
+          "type": "integer"
+        },
+        "status": {
+          "enum": [
+            "complete",
+            "issues",
+            "unavailable"
+          ],
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "status",
+        "issueCount"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / report / required

Previous value: -[
-  "metrics",
-  "metricProvenance",
-  "primaryFinding",
-  "lcpEvidence",
-  "actions",
-  "dismissedFindings",
-  "runConditions",
-  "recommendations",
-  "sectionCounts",
-  "truncatedSections",
-  "warnings",
-  "limitations",
-  "nextDiagnosticStep"
-]New value: +[
+  "metrics",
+  "metricProvenance",
+  "primaryFinding",
+  "lcpEvidence",
+  "actions",
+  "dismissedFindings",
+  "runConditions",
+  "recommendations",
+  "sectionCounts",
+  "truncatedSections",
+  "warnings",
+  "pageMetadata",
+  "limitations",
+  "nextDiagnosticStep"
+]

AddedSep 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation nature is known. The description adds valuable context beyond the annotations: it consumes one free check, requires no account, and returns a private accessToken. It also instructs not to poll, which is a behavioral trait not in annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: purpose first, then return info and usage, then constraints. Every clause adds necessary information for correct selection and invocation.

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 single parameter, existing output schema, and accurate annotations, the description covers lifecycle (start, read via get_check), resource consumption, account requirements, and polling prohibition. Nothing an agent needs to call correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100% and already explains the 'url' parameter with an example. The description adds 'public webpage' but the schema also says 'Public page address', so no additional semantic meaning beyond the schema is provided. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('Start') and resource ('speed check of one public webpage'), and contrasts with the sibling tool by naming that it returns jobId/accessToken for get_check. This makes the tool's purpose distinct from compare_checks and get_check without ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent to use get_check to read the result and warns not to repeat to poll, which provides clear invocation guidance. It does not mention compare_checks, but that tool's purpose is evidently different; the core usage context is well defined.

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

All Nimo tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?