relayted API

Web page to Markdown

markdown

Fetch a public web page and return its main content as Markdown (inline text). Costs 45 Payloads (0.0045 EUR) per page.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	Public http(s) address of the page.
`job_id`	No	Collect the result of an earlier markdown job instead of starting a new one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real value beyond the annotations by disclosing per-page cost (45 Payloads / 0.0045 EUR) and the inline-text return form. It does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or why idempotentHint is false, leaving some behavioral gaps given openWorldHint=true and readOnlyHint=false.

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?

Two sentences with no waste; the core action is front-loaded and the cost caveat follows immediately. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

For a two-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return format, and cost, which is nearly everything an agent needs. The remaining gap is that the async/job_id retrieval pattern is never explained, only implied by the schema.

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 both url and job_id are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the public-http constraint on url but adds no new meaning for job_id or the async result-collection flow, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Fetch a public web page and return its main content as Markdown'), which lets an agent understand the operation immediately. It does not distinguish itself from likely siblings like pdf or shot, which also convert external content, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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 only implied: the tool is for turning a public web page into Markdown. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative is named, though the 'public' qualifier does narrow the scope somewhat.

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

All relayted API 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?