ScraperWatch

find_scrapers

Which tracked scrapers have the most recorded 30-day users for a website? Uses the filtered official Apify Store export; data_updated is the saved snapshot timestamp, with age/status in evidence. Returns usage, run completion and billing fields, not live tests. min_success_rate: zero includes unknown rates; positive thresholds require known rates.

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": {
      "site": "<site>"
    },
    "name": "find_scrapers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes
`limit`	No
`min_success_rate`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 20, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / min_success_rate / maximum
```
Added value: +1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / min_success_rate / minimum
```
Added value: +0
```
First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the whole burden and does disclose meaningful traits: the data source (filtered official Apify Store export), that data_updated is a saved snapshot timestamp with age/status attached, staleness caveats, and exactly which fields come back (usage, run completion, billing; not live tests). It omits auth/rate-limit behavior, but the provenance and snapshot-lag disclosures go well beyond the schema.

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?

Four compact sentences, front-loaded with the core question and then the data-source and parameter caveats. Density is high and little is wasted, though the 'data_updated ... age/status in evidence' clause is awkward and could be tightened.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the data source, result fields and one parameter's semantics, which is respectable. It still leaves 'site' and 'limit' undefined and says nothing about ordering, pagination or what happens with an untracked site.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain min_success_rate precisely (zero includes unknown rates; positive thresholds require known rates), which is genuinely useful, but leaves 'site' and 'limit' entirely undefined in both schema and description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Which tracked scrapers have the most recorded 30-day users for a website'), and the phrase 'not live tests' plus 'recorded' data narrows scope. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closest siblings, best_scraper and compare_scrapers, so an agent must infer the difference from the ranking language.

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?

The description implies usage ('for a website', ranked by 30-day users, sourced from the filtered official Apify Store export) but never states when to pick this over best_scraper or compare_scrapers, nor any prerequisite for a site to be 'tracked'. Usage is implied rather than prescribed.

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

All ScraperWatch 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?