Skip to main content
Glama

agent-access-index

by io.github.agentwares
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Check whether an agent may fetch a URL

access_check_url
Read-onlyIdempotent

Says whether an AI agent may fetch a URL, on what terms, and at what price. Reads robots.txt for a generic agent and for every AI user-agent the operators document, the Content-signal and Content-Usage directives, any RSL licence the origin links, and the live response to an honestly-identified request.

Verdicts: allowed (it served us), allowed_if_identified (the written policy permits this but bot management refused an anonymous request — signing as a named crawler is the documented route), charged (there is a price, quoted where the rail will show one), blocked (the site disallows the agents that would want this, with nothing to buy), and unknown (the origin did not answer, or the URL is not there).

Never evades: no CAPTCHA solving, no proxies, no spoofed user-agents. Refusals come back as findings with the evidence attached.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesAbsolute http(s) URL of the page to check, e.g. https://example.com/article
skipWellKnownNoWhen true, the five well-known probes are skipped; faster, and those files are almost always absent
includeEvidenceNoWhen true, the answer includes every request made, with status and headers (default false: it is large)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / includeEvidence / description
      Previous value: -"Include every request made, with status and headers (default false: it is large)"New value: +"When true, the answer includes every request made, with status and headers (default false: it is large)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / skipWellKnown / description
      Previous value: -"Skip the five well-known probes; faster, and they are almost always absent"New value: +"When true, the five well-known probes are skipped; faster, and those files are almost always absent"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safe-read profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), yet the description adds substantial context: the specific evidence sources consulted (robots.txt, Content-signal/Content-Usage, RSL licences, live request), the 'Never evades' constraint (no CAPTCHA solving, proxies, or spoofed user-agents), and that refusals return as structured findings with evidence.

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, then the evidence sources and verdict list. The verdict enumeration is essential since there is no output schema. It is longer than strictly necessary, but nearly every sentence carries information; minor trimming of the verdict glosses would help.

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 no output schema in play, the description properly compensates by enumerating the five possible verdicts and their meanings, plus the guarantee that refusals surface as findings with evidence. An agent has everything needed to call the tool and interpret the result.

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 url, skipWellKnown, and includeEvidence. The description adds marginal value by explaining that well-known probes are part of the normal work (justifying skipWellKnown), but it adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Says whether an AI agent may fetch a URL, on what terms, and at what price.' The resource (URL accessibility policy) is distinct from the siblings access_explain_verdicts (explains results) and access_list_agents (enumerates agents), so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Clearly implies the context: check a URL before an agent fetches it, and it explains what the tool inspects plus the full verdict taxonomy so the caller knows how to interpret results. However, it never names when to prefer a sibling (e.g. access_explain_verdicts for interpreting an existing verdict), so usage is strong but not fully routed.

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

All agent-access-index toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources