Skip to main content
Glama

Unphurl

by io.github.123Ergo

estimate_urls

Read-onlyIdempotent

Pre-flight credit estimator for a list of URLs. Returns counts + credit estimate. Free, no credits consumed.

Call this before check_urls to show the user how many credits the batch will cost. Classifies each URL against three free gates:

  • tranco: URL's registrable domain is in the Tranco top 100K (trusted, treated as clean with score 0, no pipeline needed)

  • cached: URL's hostname is already in Unphurl's reputation cache (results available, no pipeline needed)

  • unknown: URL needs full pipeline analysis (costs 1 credit per URL)

Returns counts for each gate plus total, credits_needed, credits_min, and credits_max. credits_min and credits_max are both equal to the unknown count in the current implementation.

Maximum 500 URLs per call. Rate limit: 10 requests per minute. Does not follow redirects; classifies each URL as submitted.

Typical agent flow:

  1. Collect a list of URLs

  2. Call estimate_urls to get the cost breakdown

  3. Show the user the breakdown and ask for approval

  4. On approval, call check_urls on the unknowns only

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYesList of URLs to classify (maximum 500 per call)

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses valuable behavioral traits: it is free and consumes no credits, classifies URLs into three gates (tranco, cached, unknown), does not follow redirects, and returns credits_min/max equal to the unknown count. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening, bullet-point details on gates, and a numbered typical flow. Every sentence adds necessary information—no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description supplies all necessary context: purpose, free behavior, gate classifications, return fields, limits, and a recommended workflow. Annotations cover safety, so the tool is fully specified for the agent.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already lists the urls parameter with a clear description, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds meaning by explaining how the URLs are classified (tranco/cached/unknown) and the maximum batch size, giving the agent deeper understanding of what should be passed.

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?

The description clearly states it is a 'Pre-flight credit estimator for a list of URLs' with a specific verb ('estimate') and resource ('URLs'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly instructing 'Call this before check_urls', making its unique role clear.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: 'Call this before check_urls' and a 'Typical agent flow' with sequential steps. It also mentions concrete constraints like max 500 URLs and rate limit of 10 requests per minute, giving clear when-to-use and operational context.

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

All Unphurl toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: check_url vs check_urls distinguish single vs batch, allowlist CRUD tools are separated, and profile management is distinct from account billing. Minor overlap exists between get_balance and get_stats (both report balance) and between list_profiles and show_defaults (both relate to scoring configuration), but descriptions clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (check_url, create_profile, list_allowlist, get_balance). A few outliers like purchase and signup are single verbs, but they are standard and do not break the overall predictability.

Tool Count4/5

18 tools is above the ideal 3-15 range but appropriate for the server's broad scope: URL analysis, custom scoring profiles, allowlist management, account billing, and reporting. Each tool serves a distinct function and none feel redundant or superfluous.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core domain thoroughly: single and batch URL checks, credit estimation, profile CRUD (create, list, delete, show defaults), allowlist CRUD, history, and account management (signup, balance, pricing, purchase). Minor gaps exist, such as no delete history or direct retrieval of a single past check by ID, but these are not critical.

Resources