Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Orb Studio news radars

by io.github.farenberglord-star
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Can an AI agent read this site?

check_agent_access
Read-only

Check whether AI agents may access any public web page. Reads the site's robots.txt and evaluates the given path for 17 AI user agents grouped as user-triggered assistants (ChatGPT-User, Claude-User, Perplexity-User...), AI search bots and training crawlers (GPTBot, ClaudeBot, Google-Extended, CCBot...). Also reports Cloudflare Content-Signal (ai-train, ai-input, search), X-Robots-Tag and meta robots (noai, noindex), bot challenges on the page, and whether llms.txt, ai.txt or an agent card exist. Returns an openness score 0-100, a verdict and plain advice. Use it before fetching a site for a user, to respect the owner's choices. Cached 6 hours.

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": "check_agent_access"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPage or domain to check, e.g. https://example.com/news or example.com
agent_nameNoOptional: your agent name, counted as activity if you registered with register_agent

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description enumerates every signal source consulted (robots.txt across 17 named AI agents, Cloudflare Content-Signal, X-Robots-Tag, meta robots, bot challenges, llms.txt/ai.txt/agent card) and states the return shape (openness score 0-100, verdict, plain advice). It also discloses the 6-hour cache, which the annotations do not cover.

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 question and mechanism are front-loaded, and the parenthetical agent lists efficiently convey scope without separate sentences. The enumeration of signal sources runs long, but each item maps to actual returned data rather than filler.

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, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so concretely (score scale, verdict, advice). Combined with the disclosed caching and full signal inventory, an agent has everything needed to call it 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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the agent_name link to register_agent. The description adds only marginal framing ('evaluates the given path') and relies on the schema for input format, which is the correct baseline 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.

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ('Check whether AI agents may access any public web page') and immediately names the mechanism (robots.txt plus path evaluation). No sibling tool touches web-access policy, so there is no risk of confusion with register_agent or the get_* feeds.

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 gives an explicit trigger and rationale: 'Use it before fetching a site for a user, to respect the owner's choices.' That is a clear when-to-use context, but there is no when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative for cases where a quick fetch is still acceptable.

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

All Orb Studio news radars toolsInspect
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