get_analysisFetch the result of a previous analyze_website run by its analysis id: the 0-100 score, grade, per-dimension scores and top issues. Ids come from analyze_website results and report URLs (webanalyzer.dev/report/).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Analysis id returned by analyze_website (also the last segment of a report or badge URL). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying what the response contains (score, grade, per-dimension scores, top issues) and where valid ids come from, giving the agent useful behavioral context beyond 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, then efficiently covers what the response includes and where the id comes from. Every sentence earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter fetch with no output schema, the description is complete: it states the input provenance, the output content, and the operation type. An agent needs no additional information to invoke the tool correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents the id parameter thoroughly, including its return source and URL relationship. The description repeats and slightly reinforces this information but does not add meaningful new semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a clear resource ('stored analysis') and a key identifier ('analysis id'), and it lists the returned contents (score, grade, per-dimension scores, top issues). It is clearly distinguished from siblings: analyze_website creates runs, get_analysis fetches a previous run's result, and get_leaderboard serves a different purpose.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clearly states when to use this tool: after a previous analyze_website run, when you have an id from that run's results or from a report URL. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select this tool correctly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: analyze_website starts a new analysis, get_analysis retrieves a past result, and get_leaderboard lists top-scoring sites. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern: analyze_website, get_analysis, get_leaderboard. The verbs and nouns are clear, consistent, and predictable.
Three tools is well-scoped for a focused analysis service: one to trigger analysis, one to fetch results, and one to access the leaderboard. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The surface covers the full workflow for the domain: run a website analysis, retrieve that analysis by ID, and view the public leaderboard. No update or delete operations are necessary for this one-shot, immutable analysis model.