SiteCheck Web Intel

Reads one public web page and returns its title

search_website_content_crawler

Read-only

Reads one public web page and returns its title, description and main text as Markdown (headings, links, lists), plus link counts. Reads only the page you name: no crawling of other pages, no JavaScript rendering, so pages that build their text in the browser may come back short. 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": "search_website_content_crawler"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Full http or https address of a public page
`maxChars`	No	Longest Markdown returned, 500 to 40000 characters (default 8000)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`links`	No
`title`	No
`source`	No
`markdown`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`truncated`	No
`httpStatus`	No
`description`	No
`markdownChars`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations by disclosing the no-JS rendering limitation, the risk of truncated content, and the metered cost model ($0.002 USDC per successful call, x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, failed calls free). Cost and failure-charging behavior are exactly the kind of facts 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output shape, then limitations, then pricing. No filler, and each sentence contributes a distinct fact an agent needs.

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-value enumeration is unnecessary; the description covers the remaining decision-relevant facts (scope, rendering limits, failure modes, payment). Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly or budget for it is missing.

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 url and maxChars are already documented with ranges and defaults; the description adds no format or constraint detail beyond that. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the parameter work.

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 ('Reads one public web page') plus exactly what comes back: title, description, main text as Markdown, link counts. It also bounds scope explicitly ('no crawling of other pages'), which separates it from the sibling crawler/aggregator and *_articles search tools.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool works and when it will disappoint ('no JavaScript rendering, so pages that build their text in the browser may come back short'), and states the single-page limitation. It stops short of naming an alternative tool for JS-heavy or multi-page needs, so the agent must infer the fallback.

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

All SiteCheck Web Intel 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?