Skip to main content
Glama

extract

by com.mart402
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Extract Url

extract_url
Idempotent

Extract a web page to clean Markdown + metadata (auto JS rendering, robots.txt respected). $0.005 fast / $0.01 rendered; cached results half price.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesAbsolute http(s) URL of the input (web page or PDF, per tool)
modeNoExtraction mode: auto (fast with rendered fallback), fast, heavyauto
x_paymentNoOptional: base64 X-PAYMENT header value (x402 exact scheme, USDC on Base mainnet). Omit it to receive the payment requirements (accepts[] + docs) for this call without being charged.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / mode / description
      Added value: +"Extraction mode: auto (fast with rendered fallback), fast, heavy"
    • addedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Added value: +"Absolute http(s) URL of the input (web page or PDF, per tool)"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Removed value: -"Target URL"
    • addedInput schema / properties / x_payment
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: base64 X-PAYMENT header value (x402 exact scheme, USDC on Base mainnet). Omit it to receive the payment requirements (accepts[] + docs) for this call without being charged.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: auto JS rendering, robots.txt respect, and pricing including cached-result discounts. It also explains the rendered-versus-fast trade-off, which helps set expectations. No contradiction with the 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?

The description is two concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by high-value behavioral and pricing details.

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?

The description covers the output format, rendering behavior, robots handling, and pricing. It relies on the schema for payment details and mode semantics, which is reasonable given the schema's thoroughness. Minor gaps include lack of explicit response structure or error behavior, but these are not critical.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds the output format context (Markdown + metadata) but does not explain parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 and resource: extracting a web page into clean Markdown plus metadata. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like pdf_info or ocr_image, which target different input types and outputs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: use this when you need a URL's content as Markdown. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings such as structured_extract or parse_document, and no stated exclusions or special cases.

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

All extract toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources