oassis — web scraping, crawling and browser control for AI agents

web_feedback

Tell us an answer was good or bad. FREE. Use it when a result is wrong — empty markdown, a control map missing a button, data that does not match the page — with the url or the jobId so it can be reproduced. It is the only way we learn that we read a page badly: our logs cannot tell that apart from a page that is simply like that. Reference for the oassis API: https://oassis.dev/openapi.json

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": {
      "verdict": "<verdict>"
    },
    "name": "web_feedback"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	The page that came out wrong: usually the fastest way to reproduce it.
`route`	No	Which tool or endpoint it is about, as you called it.
`comment`	No	What you expected and what you got.
`verdict`	Yes	Did the answer do the job or not.
`reference`	No	The jobId or sessionId it happened on, so it can be looked up.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed11 schema fields changedOct 4, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / comment / maxLength
```
Added value: +2000
```
- addedInput schema / properties / comment / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
- changedInput schema / properties / reference / description
```
Previous value: -"The jobId or sessionId it happened on."New value: +"The jobId or sessionId it happened on, so it can be looked up."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / reference / maxLength
```
Added value: +200
```
- addedInput schema / properties / reference / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
- changedInput schema / properties / route / description
```
Previous value: -"Which tool or endpoint it is about."New value: +"Which tool or endpoint it is about, as you called it."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / route / maxLength
```
Added value: +120
```
- addedInput schema / properties / route / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
- changedInput schema / properties / url / description
```
Previous value: -"The page that came out wrong."New value: +"The page that came out wrong: usually the fastest way to reproduce it."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / url / format
```
Added value: +"uri"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / verdict / description
```
Added value: +"Did the answer do the job or not."
```
First observedSep 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations say not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive. The description adds that this is the only channel for the service to learn about bad reads and that logs cannot detect it. It does not state what happens after submission (no response/output schema), which keeps it below 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

Front-loads the action and trigger examples well, but then runs long with the rationale about logs and the API-spec link. The sentences earn some of their place, though the behavioral motivation could be trimmed.

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?

Covers the trigger conditions, the reproduction identifiers, and why the feedback matters, sufficient for a 5-param report tool with no output schema. Missing only explicit confirmation of what the caller receives after submission.

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 the schema already documents every parameter. The description adds reproduction-orientation ('with the url or the jobId') but no syntax or field-level detail beyond the schema, so 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 (report/feedback) and resource (an answer/result) and frames it as a quality-signal tool. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like web_act or web_scrape, but its purpose is clear enough that an agent can tell it apart from the retrieval tools.

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?

Gives concrete conditions for use ('when a result is wrong — empty markdown, a control map missing a button, data that does not match the page') and mentions supplying url or jobId for reproduction. It does not name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the triggers are sharp.

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

All oassis — web scraping, crawling and browser control for AI agents 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?