Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

W3c

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

W3c Search

w3c_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find W3C / web-standards specifications by keyword or topic — HTML, CSS, WCAG accessibility, DOM, SVG, WAI-ARIA, WebAuthn, Fetch, and 800+ others. Answers "what W3C spec defines X", "the CSS grid specification", "web accessibility standard", "which spec covers custom elements". Returns specs with shortname, title, status (Recommendation / Working Draft / Living Standard), organization, and official URL. Example: w3c_search({ query: "flexbox" }).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax results 1-25 (default 10).
queryYesKeyword(s) matched against spec titles, e.g. "flexbox", "accessibility", "web components".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "flexbox"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 5,
+    "query": "web accessibility"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds detail on return fields (shortname, title, status, organization, URL) which is useful and does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences plus an example call, zero wasted words, front-loaded with purpose. Highly efficient.

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?

Given small parameter count (2), no output schema needed, the description fully covers what the tool does and returns. Examples help clarify usage. Complete for a search tool.

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 parameters described. The description adds examples but does not significantly extend schema meaning, so baseline 3.

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 clearly states the verb (Find) and resource (W3C/web-standards specifications), provides specific examples of queries and return fields, and distinguishes from sibling tool 'w3c_spec' by focusing on search.

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?

The description gives clear use cases like 'what W3C spec defines X' but does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives like w3c_spec for retrieving a single spec.

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

All W3c 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