SiteCheck Shop & Social

Facebook Page profile from Facebook's public Page Plugin

social_facebook_pages

Read-only

Facebook Page profile from Facebook's public Page Plugin: page name, follower count, verified flag and page link. Posts and discussions are not in the public plugin and are not returned. Facebook may block or rate-limit automated requests (503). Related tools on this server, for a different need: social_facebook_followers_following when you need Facebook Page follower counts from Facebook's public Page; social_facebook_posts when you need latest public posts of a Facebook Page as a logged-out. 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": {
      "page": "<page>"
    },
    "name": "social_facebook_pages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	Yes	Facebook page username (e.g. nasa) or numeric page id

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, it discloses practical operational traits an agent cannot infer: Facebook may block or rate-limit automated requests with 503, posts/discussions are excluded from the response, and billing is $0.002 per successful call via x402 with no charge on failure. That is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot carry.

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 field list and the exclusion of posts are front-loaded, and pricing/rate-limit notes come last where they belong. Minor waste and a garbled phrase ('as a logged-out') keep it from a 5, but nothing meaningful is buried or repeated.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what is returned, what is not returned, failure/rate-limit behavior, cost model, and which sibling to prefer. No material gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented as 'Facebook page username (e.g. nasa) or numeric page id'. The description adds nothing further about accepted identifier forms or validation, so the 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?

The description names the exact resource (a Facebook Page profile from the public Page Plugin) and enumerates the returned fields: page name, follower count, verified flag and page link. It also draws an explicit boundary ('Posts and discussions are not in the public plugin and are not returned'), which separates it from social_facebook_posts without any schema inspection.

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?

It names two sibling tools and the conditions that select them (follower counts via social_facebook_followers_following, latest posts via social_facebook_posts), which is rare and useful routing guidance. The gap is that this tool itself returns a follower count, so the stated distinction from social_facebook_followers_following ('when you need Facebook Page follower counts') does not actually disambiguate the pair.

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?