SiteCheck

List the URLs in a website's sitemaps

sitemap

Read-only

All URLs a website lists in its XML sitemaps (from robots.txt, /sitemap.xml or /sitemap_index.xml, following indexes), with lastmod, newest first. Filter by path prefix and changed-since date. For agents that need a site's page list before reading pages. 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": "sitemap"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	Site URL or domain
`limit`	No	Max URLs, 1-10000, default 1000
`since`	No	YYYY-MM-DD: only URLs with lastmod on or after it
`pathPrefix`	No	Only URLs whose path starts with this, e.g. /blog/

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	No
`urls`	No
`returned`	No
`sitemaps`	No
`totalUrls`	No
`truncated`	No
`sitemapsRead`	No
`childSitemapsSkipped`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 14, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "childSitemapsSkipped": {},
+    "returned": {},
+    "site": {},
+    "sitemaps": {},
+    "sitemapsRead": {},
+    "totalUrls": {},
+    "truncated": {},
+    "urls": {}
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's main added value is the sitemap discovery chain, index-following behavior, result ordering, and the paid-call model ($0.002 USDC via x402 on Base/Solana/Arc, failures not charged) — none of which are in the annotations. It does not cover what happens when no sitemap exists, cache freshness, or rate limits on the metered endpoint.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the resource and discovery sources, then filters, then cost. The payment sentence is necessary disclosure rather than filler, though the opening parenthetical is dense and slightly interrupts the core statement of what the tool does.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema covers return values and the annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile, so the description only needs discovery semantics and cost — both present, including the fact that failed calls are free. Minor gaps remain around behavior when sitemaps are absent or malformed and whether requests are cached/billed per retry.

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% — url, limit, since, and pathPrefix are each documented with format and defaults. The description's "filter by path prefix and changed-since date" merely restates those two filters, adding no format or edge-case detail (e.g. how since interacts with URLs lacking lastmod). Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a precise resource (all URLs in a site's XML sitemaps) and the discovery path (robots.txt, /sitemap.xml or /sitemap_index.xml, following indexes), plus the returned fields (lastmod, newest first). It is clearly distinct from a general page fetch, but it never names the adjacent siblings an agent might confuse it with (links, robots, subdomains, llms_txt).

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?

"For agents that need a site's page list before reading pages" gives a concrete use context and sequencing cue for the crawl-before-read pattern. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so an agent must infer whether this or links/robots is the right call for a given task.

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

All SiteCheck 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.