page_linksEvery hyperlink on a page, resolved to absolute URLs, each with its anchor text and whether it stays on the same host. Use to crawl an index, find the real article behind a landing page, or enumerate a documentation table of contents before deciding what to read. Capped at 300 links. Costs $0.008 USDC per call via x402 on Base.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Absolute http(s) URL of the page whose links you want. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses output details (absolute URLs, anchor text, same-host flag), a 300-link cap, and cost per call via x402 on Base. This is rich, non-obvious context well beyond a simple statement of what the tool does.
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?
Three sentences, each earning its place: first defines the output, second covers use cases, third surfaces the cap and cost. The most important information is front-loaded, and there is no fluff.
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?
For a tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains the return value structure and key behavioral limits. It omits nothing necessary for an agent to decide whether and how to invoke it.
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?
The schema already documents the single url parameter with 100% coverage, including the requirement for an absolute http(s) URL. The description adds no additional parameter-specific syntax or constraints, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 explicitly states the tool returns every hyperlink on a page, resolved to absolute URLs, with anchor text and same-host status. This is a specific verb-resource pairing and clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools like read_page and demand_report, which serve different purposes.
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 provides explicit use cases: crawling an index, finding the real article behind a landing page, and enumerating documentation table of contents. It gives clear context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name an alternative.
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.
Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: demand_report aggregates market demand, page_links extracts URLs, read_page fetches page content, and request_data handles custom data inquiries. There is no functional overlap or ambiguity between them.
Two tools follow a noun_noun pattern (demand_report, page_links) while two follow verb_noun (read_page, request_data). The mix is minor but inconsistent, yet all names remain intuitive and descriptive.
With four tools, the server is well-scoped for its dual purpose of web extraction and demand aggregation. Each tool earns its place, and the count is neither too thin nor excessive.
Core extraction capabilities—fetching readable content and enumerating links—are covered, with additional market intelligence tools. Missing advanced features like JavaScript rendering or screenshots are stated limitations rather than obvious gaps.