Agent Read Proxy

by dev.workers.agent-read-proxy.agent-read-proxy

page_links

List every link on a web page with its anchor text, marked internal (same site) or external, deduplicated. Use scope=internal to crawl a site, or external to find outbound references. Price: $0.001 USDC (x402).

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": "page_links"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Public http(s) web page
`scope`	No	Which links to return

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses deduplication, internal/external labeling, and the $0.001 USDC x402 cost, which is valuable non-schema context. It does not say whether JavaScript-rendered links are captured (relevant given a read_rendered_page sibling) or whether there is a cap/pagination on the number of links returned.

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?

Three short sentences with the core behavior and dedup guarantee front-loaded, followed by scoping guidance and pricing. No sentence is redundant.

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 2-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description says what comes back (links with anchor text and internal/external marking, deduplicated) and what each scope value is for. The main gap is the absence of any statement about link-count limits or JS rendering, which matters given the sibling set.

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 parameters are already documented; baseline is 3. The description adds modest semantic value by explaining the practical intent behind scope=internal versus external, but adds nothing about the url parameter format beyond the schema's uri/format constraint.

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: list every link on a web page, with anchor text, internal/external classification, and deduplication. That is far more informative than the name alone. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the closest sibling, site_sitemap, which also deals with links across a site.

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 routing advice for the scope parameter: scope=internal to crawl a site, scope=external to find outbound references. It does not address when to choose this over site_sitemap or read_page, so sibling-level exclusions are absent.

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

All Agent Read Proxy 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?