SiteCheck Shop & Social

Contact details published on one public web page you name

social_contact_info

Read-only

Contact details published on one public web page you name (https only): mailto and tel links, email addresses written in the page text, and links to social profiles, plus the page title. Reads the single page only, does not crawl, and returns nothing that the page does not show. Related tools on this server, for a different need: social_facebook_page_contact_info when you need contact details from a Facebook Page's About tab: category; social_instagram_contact when you need public contact details of an Instagram account. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "social_contact_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Public https page URL to read (one page, max 300 characters)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`emails`	No
`phones`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`socialLinks`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description carries real weight and does add context: no crawling, no data beyond what the page displays, and a billing model of $0.002 per successful call via x402 with failed calls uncharged. That pricing and failure-billing detail is behavior an agent cannot get from annotations, though the mechanics of payment setup are left implicit.

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?

The core capability is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by scope limits, then alternatives, then price — a sensible ordering. The pricing and payment-rail sentence is long and somewhat dense, but it carries information the agent needs before calling a paid tool, so it is not wasted.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape need not be explained, yet the description still enumerates the extracted fields. Combined with the https-only constraint, the no-crawl scope, and the cost model, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains the URL and its 300-character cap. The description still adds the meaningful constraint that the URL must be https and must be a public page, which the schema does not state.

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 names a specific verb-and-resource pair — extracting contact details (mailto/tel links, in-text emails, social profile links, page title) from a single named public https page. It then explicitly contrasts itself with two named siblings, social_facebook_page_contact_info and social_instagram_contact, so an agent can route without opening 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states the selection condition for each alternative: use this tool for an arbitrary public page, use the Facebook tool for a Page's About tab, use the Instagram tool for an account. It also sets a negative boundary — reads the single page only, does not crawl — which tells the agent what this tool will not do.

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

All SiteCheck Shop & Social 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?