Skip to main content
Glama

web_read

web_read
Read-only

Read any public web page as clean, LLM-ready markdown: title, meta description, language and main content with navigation, ads and scripts removed. Follows redirects. Cheapest way to read a URL before deciding whether to pay for a full render. Price: $0.001 USDC per call (x402).

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": "web_read"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic http(s) URL to read
max_charsNoMaximum characters of markdown to return, 1000-200000 (default 60000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint, so the description carries most of the load and does so well: it discloses redirect following, content cleaning (nav/ads/scripts removed), and a concrete price of $0.001 USDC per call via x402. It does not cover rate limits or failure behavior, which keeps it from a 5.

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, each earning its place: output shape first, behavior second, cost and decision guidance last. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

With no output schema, the description successfully conveys the return shape (title, meta, language, main content) and the unit and format of output, plus the payment model. An agent has enough to call it correctly, with only edge-case behavior left unspecified.

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%, with both url and max_chars documented in the schema including the 1000-200000 range and default. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read any public web page') and further specifies the exact artifact returned: clean markdown with title, meta description, language and main content. This distinguishes it from a generic fetch or render tool without needing the schema.

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 a clear usage condition: it is 'the cheapest way to read a URL before deciding whether to pay for a full render', which tells the agent to try this first. It stops short of naming the alternative tool explicitly, so the routing is implied rather than directed.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.