Skip to main content
Glama

Server Details

URL to clean article markdown/text + metadata and links. Deterministic. $0.001/call via x402.

Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL

Glama MCP Gateway

Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.

MCP client
Glama
MCP server

Full call logging

Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.

Tool access control

Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.

Managed credentials

Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.

Usage analytics

See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.

100% free. Your data is private.
Tool DescriptionsA

Average 3.9/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility for confusion or overlap, so disambiguation is perfect.

Naming Consistency5/5

Single tool named 'page_extract' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is consistent and descriptive.

Tool Count3/5

A single tool for page extraction feels slightly thin for the stated purpose; while it covers the core operation, additional tools for separate text, markdown, or metadata extraction would improve scope.

Completeness3/5

The tool covers the main extraction task but has notable gaps: it cannot handle JavaScript-rendered pages, and it returns combined content (text, markdown, metadata) in one output, lacking granular extraction options.

Available Tools

1 tool
page_extractAInspect

Fetches a URL and returns clean article text/markdown plus metadata. Deterministic, static HTML only, no JS rendering.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
formatNo
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses deterministic behavior, static HTML only, and no JS rendering. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and adequately covers key behavioral traits. It lacks details on error handling or rate limits but is still transparent for a simple fetch operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add behavioral constraints. Every word adds value; there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is moderately complete. It explains the basic function and limitations but omits details about the metadata format, error handling, or supported URL schemes. For a simple tool, it suffices but could be more thorough.

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 mentions 'markdown' and 'text' which relate to the format parameter, but does not explicitly describe the url parameter or the full enum set. The output description hints at format but adds minimal semantics beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool fetches a URL and returns clean article text/markdown plus metadata. The verb 'fetches' and resource 'URL' are specific, and the output format is explicitly defined. Although there are no sibling tools for differentiation, the description alone provides excellent clarity.

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?

No sibling tools exist, so explicit when-to-use vs alternatives is not applicable. The description implies usage for extracting clean text from URLs but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool, earning a baseline score for minimal guidance.

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

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Try in Browser

Your Connectors

Sign in to create a connector for this server.

Resources