Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Utilities Hosted

by dev.workers.agent-utilities.agent-utilities
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

web_robots_evaluate

Read-only

Evaluate supplied robots.txt for a URL and user agent; no network fetch. FREE during validation. No key, credits or wallet. Existing source and input limits apply.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
requestIdNoOptional legacy field; ignored in free mode.
maxPriceMicroUsdNoOptional legacy field; ignored in free mode.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scopeYes
allowedYes
sitemapsYes
crawlDelayYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / description
      Previous value: -"Explicit maximum new debit; 0 means recovery only."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."
    • removedInput schema / properties / maxPriceMicroUsd / maximum
      Removed value: -999999999999
    • changedInput schema / properties / requestId / description
      Previous value: -"Persist the ID returned by agent_utilities_prepare. Reuse after uncertainty."New value: +"Optional legacy field; ignored in free mode."
    • removedInput schema / properties / requestId / pattern
      Removed value: -"^\\d{13}_[A-Za-z0-9_-]{16,80}$"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "input",
-  "requestId",
-  "maxPriceMicroUsd"
-]New value: +[
+  "input"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds real operational context beyond them: no network access, free during validation, and no key/credits/wallet required. It does not describe how malformed or empty robots input is handled, which is the remaining behavioral gap.

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 core purpose, followed by three terse clauses on cost and limits. No wasted words, though the 'FREE during validation / No key, credits or wallet' pair is mildly 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. The description covers offline behavior, cost, and limits — enough for an agent to call it correctly, with only parsing/edge-case semantics left unstated.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67% with the three required nested fields (url, robots, userAgent) carrying only maxLength constraints and no prose. The description merely restates those three inputs and adds no format, default, or interpretation guidance to compensate for the gap.

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 ('Evaluate supplied robots.txt for a URL and user agent') and immediately distinguishes itself from the fetch-based siblings with 'no network fetch'. An agent can tell this is an offline, pure-evaluation tool without inspecting any schema.

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?

'Supplied robots.txt' implies the caller must already have the robots content, and 'no network fetch' implies the fetch siblings are the alternative — but neither is stated explicitly, and no sibling is named. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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

All Agent Utilities Hosted toolsInspect
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