Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

AgentViva

by dev.agentviva
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Is this address working right now?

check_url
Read-only

Check any public website or hosted MCP server once, right now, and get what AgentViva saw: works, partly works, does not work, or blocked (the site refused the check or asks bots not to open it, which does not mean it is down), with the evidence (HTTP status, where the redirects ended, the page title, or the MCP tools it lists). No API key needed. One check is a snapshot, not a verdict over time: for a tool AgentViva watches every day, lookup_tool gives its confirmed state and history. The same address is answered from a 5-minute copy. Private and local addresses are refused.

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": "check_url"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe address, for example notion.so or https://example.com/mcp.
typeNopage (a website, the default) or mcp (a hosted MCP server).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds the operational facts an agent needs: no API key required, private/local addresses refused, results served from a 5-minute cached copy of the same address, and a 'blocked' outcome that does not mean the site is down. It also discloses what evidence comes back (HTTP status, redirect destination, page title, listed MCP tools).

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?

Front-loaded with the action and outcome vocabulary, then caveats and the sibling alternative. Dense but every clause carries information; the parenthetical about 'blocked' is long but prevents a real misinterpretation.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes on the job of describing return values and does so (four outcome states plus supporting evidence fields). Combined with the caching, auth, and refusal notes, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and interpret the result.

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 100%, so both url and the page/mcp enum are already documented with an example. The description reinforces the public-website vs hosted-MCP-server split but adds no format or edge-case detail about the parameters themselves beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check any public website or hosted MCP server once, right now') and immediately scopes the result set to four outcome categories. It also distinguishes itself from lookup_tool, the monitoring sibling, so an agent can choose without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the agent: for a tool AgentViva watches every day, use lookup_tool instead, because one check is a snapshot not a verdict over time. It also names the excluded inputs (private and local addresses are refused), which prevents predictable failed calls.

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

All AgentViva toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources