Stablecoin Gateways

Web Page to Markdown

page_to_markdown

Read-onlyIdempotent

Web page to markdown: give a public URL, get its main content as clean Markdown for LLMs (navigation, footers and scripts removed) with title, canonical URL, language, publish date and links. Use when an agent needs to read, quote or summarise a page. Respects robots.txt, ai.txt and noai; no paywall bypass; refusals are not charged. Signed receipt. Price: $0.002 per call via x402 (USDC on Base or XRP on XRPL). The response includes a provenance block (sg-provenance/1): each fact carries its source, source URL, retrieval time and limits; evidence only, no score, rating or verdict. Example arguments: {"url":"https://example.org/"}.

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": "page_to_markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Public http(s) URL of one page

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No	Main page content as Markdown with title, canonical URL, language, publish date and links
`receipt`	No	Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt. New receipts carry a signed `evidence` object: service_version, data_timestamp, validation, terms_version, terms_hash, provenance_hash.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / data / properties / provenance

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The response includes a `provenance` block (sg-provenance/1): each fact carries its source, source URL, retrieval time and limits; evidence only, no score, rating or verdict."
+}

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / receipt / description

Previous value: -"Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt"New value: +"Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt. New receipts carry a signed `evidence` object: service_version, data_timestamp, validation, terms_version, terms_hash, provenance_hash."

Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Paid result: { data, receipt }. Unpaid calls return an x402 PaymentRequired object instead (isError: true).",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Main page content as Markdown with title, canonical URL, language, publish date and links",
+      "properties": {
+        "canonical": {},
+        "content_type": {},
+        "description": {},
+        "fetched_at": {},
+        "final_url": {},
+        "lang": {},
+        "links": {},
+        "markdown": {},
+        "notes": {},
+        "published": {},
+        "publisher_policy_checks": {},
+        "robots": {},
+        "status": {},
+        "title": {},
+        "truncated": {},
+        "url": {},
+        "word_count": {}
+      }
+    },
+    "receipt": {
+      "description": "Ed25519-signed, hash-chained receipt; verify free with the verify_receipt tool or POST /v1/verify-receipt"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses meaningful behavior: navigation, footers and scripts are removed; robots.txt, ai.txt and noai are respected; paywalls are not bypassed; refusals are not charged; a signed receipt is issued; and pricing is stated. It also explains the provenance response block and its evidence-only semantics, which is substantial context not captured by 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is dense but well front-loaded: purpose first, usage second, then constraints, pricing, response provenance, and an example. Every element is relevant, though the pricing and provenance details make it longer than a minimal definition.

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?

The tool has a simple one-parameter schema and an output schema, and the description still provides crucial operational context: payment model, compliance restrictions, non-charging on refusal, signed receipt, and provenance structure. It is complete enough for an agent to decide whether and how to call it without additional clarification.

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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage and explicitly documents the single url parameter as a public http(s) URL. The description reinforces this with an example argument, but adds little semantic detail beyond the schema. With one well-documented parameter, the 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 verb and resource: convert a public URL's web page into clean Markdown for LLMs. It also specifies what is retained and removed, and lists the metadata included, making the tool's purpose immediately distinguishable from unrelated siblings such as whois or sanctions_screen.

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?

It gives a clear use case: 'Use when an agent needs to read, quote or summarise a page.' It also flags important limits such as respecting robots.txt, ai.txt and noai, and no paywall bypass. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for page-reading tasks, so it falls short of a full when/when-not/alternatives routing statement.

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

All Stablecoin Gateways 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?